Work-life Balance

Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Minister for Women and Equality what recent representations she has received regarding the achievement of an acceptable work-life balance by women with children who work outside the home.

Meg Munn: The Department has received a number of representations on work-life balance as part of the recent "Work and Families: Choice and Flexibility" consultation.

Building Industry (Capacity)

Alison Seabeck: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what discussions he has had with the construction industry, the Construction Industry Training Board and the trade unions on developing capacity in the building industry.

Alun Michael: Recent ministerial meetings have taken place with various construction industry representative organisations (18 July 2005) and the Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians (30 June 2005). Issues discussed were wide ranging, and included the development of skills and capacity in the construction industry. I have also attended a number of events organised by the industry and have recently hosted a reception at DTI for leading industry representatives.
	Under the aegis of the Strategic Forum for Construction, under the chairmanship of Peter Rogers; which comprises senior members of the industry, its clients and which is supported by the DTI, CITB-Construction-Skills is working with other sector skills councils to carry out a thorough skills needs analysis for the industry.
	The Strategic Forum is also currently setting up a dedicated group to coordinate the industry's efforts for the Olympics. The work on the skills implications of construction will be a core element of this coordinated effort. I have also attended a number of events organised by the industry and have recently hosted a reception at DTI for industry representatives.

Carbon Capture Technology

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assistance his Department has given to the development of carbon capture technology in the oil and gas industries.

Malcolm Wicks: Carbon capture is a technology which is currently in the early stages of development rather than the deployment phase. I recently published a "Carbon Abatement Technologies Strategy for Fossil Fuel Use". The new strategy is available in the House of Commons Library.
	At the same time I also announced some £25 million in capital grants from next year for demonstrating these technologies. This is in addition to £20 million we have allocated for R&D into carbon abatement technologies over the period 2005–06 to 2007–08. Companies in the oil and gas industries will be eligible to apply for such support.

Export Credits Guarantee Department

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what procedures the Export Credits Guarantee Department follows where the contractor defaults due to cancellation of a contract by the purchasing country on the grounds of non-performance.

Ian Pearson: Non-performance is not an insured risk under an ECGD insurance policy. Termination of a contract only becomes relevant when an exporter makes a claim under the policy for amounts unpaid under the contract. ECGD would consider the terms of the policy and the terms of the contract in order to determine whether the exporter had a valid claim under the policy.
	The same procedures apply to overseas investments that are covered under an ECGD Overseas Investment Insurance policy.
	Where ECGD provides a guarantee to a bank, it may be entitled to recoup from the exporter the amount of any guarantee payments which it might make to the bank up to a pre-agreed limit (usually 10 per cent. of ECGD's maximum liability).
	ECGD would attempt to minimise loss or make recoveries by, among other things, directing the exporter to pursue any available remedies including arbitration or other proceedings.

Nuclear Power

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many people work (a) directly and (b) indirectly in the nuclear industry in (i) the UK, (ii) Lancashire and (iii) Cumbria.

Malcolm Wicks: The DTI has not conducted work to collate employment figures for the nuclear industry. The numbers of employees given in the following table are based on surveys by the Nuclear Industry Association (NIA) and Cogent Sector Skills Council. These include both for the civil nuclear programme and the defence programme.
	
		
			 Employment Direct Indirect(2) 
		
		
			 UK 54,000 108,000 to 160,000 
			 Lanes 3,500 7,000 to 12,000 
			 Cumbria 11,500 23,000 to 35,000 
		
	
	(2) The figures for indirect employment are given as a range because of difficulty in assessing indirect employment.

Wind Farms

Henry Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment he has made of the (a) environmental and (b) economic (i) cost and (ii) benefit of wind farms.

Malcolm Wicks: I refer the hon. Member to the Energy White Paper of 2003, and the Regulatory Impact Assessment for the recent consultation on the Renewables Obligation Review which highlight the wider case for supporting renewable forms of electricity generation.
	The recent Sustainable Development Commission Report "Wind Power in the UK" also gives authoritative Information about wind farms including their environmental and economic impacts.

Correspondence

Paul Burstow: To ask the Prime Minister how many letters to his Office from hon. Members in session (a) 2004–05 and (b) 2005–06 remain unanswered, broken down by those which are (i) one month old, (ii) two months old, (iii) three months old, (iv) four months old and (v) over six months old.

Tony Blair: In total, I have received over 650,000 items of post since November 2004 including a number of campaign cards. My Office deals with all correspondence as efficiently as possible,
	I received 513 letters from Members of Parliament for the 2004–05 session, and to date have received 266 letters from Members of Parliament for the 2005–06 session, including invitations and requests concerning constituency matters, which were dealt with as appropriate. Information regarding the dates on which individual pieces of correspondence were answered is not held in the format requested.

Departmental Staff

David Davies: To ask the Prime Minister how many full-time equivalents have worked for his Office for each of the last five financial years for which figures are available.

Tony Blair: For these purposes my Office forms part of the Cabinet Office. I refer the hon. Member to Table C of "The Civil Service Statistics 2004", copies of which are available in the Libraries of the House.

Personal Injuries

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs what progress has been made with research into the effects of changing the small claims limit for personal injuries.

Bridget Prentice: The Better Regulation Task Force in its report, "Better Routes to Redress" recommended that research should be carried out into the potential impact of raising the small claims limit for personal injury cases from the current limit of £1,000. The Government indicated that they would carry out this research and would also consider other options for dealing with these claims in a more proportionate and cost effective way. That research is currently under way and consultation will take place on any proposals which may emerge.

Personal Injuries

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs whether she plans to hold a public consultation prior to changing the small claims limit for personal injuries.

Bridget Prentice: The Government agreed to carry out research into the potential impact of raising the small claims limit, as recommended by the Better Regulation Task Force in its report: "Better Routes to Redress". The Government indicated that they would also consider other options for dealing with these claims in a more proportionate and cost effective way. That research is currently under way and consultation will take place on any proposals which may emerge.

Legislation

Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what research costs were incurred (a) in the preparation of and (b) before presentation to Parliament of the (i) Better Governance for Wales White Paper, (ii) the Transport (Wales) Bill, (iii) the Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill and (iv) the draft Tourism Accommodation (Wales) Bill.

Peter Hain: The Wales Office published the "Better Governance for Wales" White Paper in response to a request from the Assembly Government, which arose from the report to them of the Richard Commission. The cost of the Richard Commission is a matter for the Assembly.
	The Wales Office published the Transport (Wales) Bill and the Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill in draft for pre legislative scrutiny, and is planning to do the same for the Tourism Accommodation (Wales) Bill later in this session. These publications are a normal part of legislative scrutiny, and where appropriate costs are met from the Wales Office administration costs budget. Any costs incurred from research in the preparation of these Bills are matters for the Assembly.

Legislation

Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what criteria he will use to measure the consensus required to trigger a referendum on primary legislative powers for the National Assembly for Wales.

Peter Hain: Better Governance for Wales (Cm 6582) describes the circumstances in which the Government would consider a referendum. Paragraph 3.24 says:
	"the decision to hold one would need to be approved in both Parliament and the Assembly. If one was proposed by the Assembly Government, the motion would need to be endorsed by two thirds of all Assembly Members voting in favour. If the Secretary of State was minded to table an Order in Parliament, he would first be obliged to undertake such consultation as he considered appropriate. The referendum would not take place unless the Order was approved by Parliament."

Legislation

Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how much external research was commissioned by his Department (a) before introduction to Parliament, (b) during passage in Parliament and (c) after Royal Assent for (i) the Government of Wales Act 1998, (ii) the Public Services Ombudsman Wales Act 2005, (iii) the Children's Commissioner for Wales Act 2001, (iv) the Health (Wales) Act 2003 and (v) the Public Audit Wales Act 2004.

Peter Hain: The Health (Wales) Bill and Public Audit Wales Bills were both published for public consultation and pre legislative scrutiny before being introduced into Parliament.
	The idea of a Children's Commissioner was a cross-party consensus dating back to the creation of the National Assembly in 1999 and was one of the recommendations of the Waterhouse Report. The Assembly's Health and Social Services Committee was given the task of drawing up proposals for the role, remit and functions of the Commissioner and carried out a public consultation, which included taking oral evidence from witnesses. The Commissioner is subject to audit from the National Audit Office and has to produce an annual report.
	In December 2002 the Wales Office jointly published with the Welsh Assembly Government "Ombudsmen's Services in Wales: Time for change?", a consultation document on the principle of bringing together the offices of Commissioner for Local Administration in Wales (which includes the Local Commissioner), Welsh Administration Ombudsmen and Health Service Commission for Wales into a unified service. In October 2003 a consultation document on the detailed powers and jurisdiction of that new office, entitled, "A Public Services Ombudsman for Wales: Powers and Jurisdiction" was published.
	In respect of the Government of Wales Act 1998, the former Welsh Office established the National Assembly Advisory Group (NAAG) in December 1997, following the successful outcome of the referendum on devolution in Wales, to undertake wide-ranging consultation and consideration of the shape of the new Assembly.

Wales Office

Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what record is kept of work done by civil servants in the Assembly for Wales Government that has been requested by the Wales Office.

Peter Hain: Under section 41 of the Government of Wales Act 1998, civil servants working for the Assembly Government may act as agents of a relevant authority and vice versa; the definition of "relevant authority" includes the Wales Office.
	A number of such agreements have been made under which Assembly Government civil servants have acted and are acting as agents of the Wales Office, including in relation to work on Bills. No central record is kept of these agreements.

Bovine TB

Dan Norris: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the incidence of bovine TB was in (a) North East Somerset, (b) South Gloucestershire and (c) the former county of Avon area in the last period for which figures are available.

Ben Bradshaw: Disaggregated data for the geographic areas of North East Somerset, South Gloucestershire and the former county of Avon are not centrally held, and can only be obtained at disproportionate cost. An aggregate figure for "Avon" (which covers the former county of Avon, South Gloucestershire, Bath and North East Somerset and North Somerset) is set out in the following table.
	
		
			  Avon 
		
		
			 1 January-31 December 2004:  
			 Confirmed New Incidents as a percentage of tests on unrestricted herds 4.37 
		
	
	Note:
	Provisional data downloaded from the State Veterinary Service Data Warehouse on 19 May 2005. Subject to change as more data become available.

Bovine TB

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate her Department has made of the mortality rate of badgers in England and Wales in each of the last five years.

Ben Bradshaw: Mortality rates of mammals can only be determined from long term, intensive studies. Only two such studies exist on badgers, both in southern England (Woodchester Park, Gloucestershire, and Wytham Woods, Oxfordshire). Mortality rates at these sites varies from year to year in relation to weather conditions and hence food availability. Cub mortality is thought to be relatively high, both pre-emergence from the sett, and also up to the end of the first year. At Woodchester Park, where TB status is also recorded for each animal trapped, the average mortality rates for uninfected adult animals were 30.4 per cent. for males and 23.6 per cent. for females. For the small proportion of animals which had a history of more than one positive test for TB, mortality was 66.7 per cent. and 48.0 per cent. for males and females respectively. Overall at Woodchester, the average mortality is thought to be about 50 per cent.
	It is important to note that these studies are in high density populations, and therefore cannot be extrapolated to the country as a whole. Mortality rates will be different from these in lower density locations. In a study of suburban badgers in Bristol, mortality rates were 40.3 per cent. for adult females, and 28.1 per cent. for adult males.
	Other studies have estimated that approximately 50,000 badgers are killed on roads each year, making it the most important cause of death.

Hormone Disruptors

Mohammad Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the implications for the environment of the release of hormone disrupting substances; and whether these are linked to the incidence of breast cancer.

Elliot Morley: The Department is funding a considerable research programme to improve our understanding of the possible implications for the environment of exposure to hormone (endocrine) disrupting substances, in conjunction with other Government Departments and Agencies.
	We have completed specific programmes of research on endocrine disruption in the marine environment (EDMAR) and in invertebrates and top predators (EDIT). We commissioned a new programme, "Endocrine Disruption in Aquatic Environments (EDAQ)", in 2003. We have also made a considerable contribution to investigations into the potential impacts of sewage effluents on freshwater fish.
	The development of breast cancer is a complex issue and there are several recognised risk factors, including lifestyle and diet. However, there is currently no convincing evidence to link chemicals in the environment to breast cancer.

Pesticides/Chemicals (Royal Commission)

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what representations she has made to the Royal Commission on the use of pesticides and chemicals.

Elliot Morley: With respect to representations made regarding the Royal Commission's study into Bystander Exposure to Pesticides; Defra officials have provided written and oral briefing, answered specific questions raised by the Royal Commission and commented factually on the draft report.
	The Government's response to The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution's 24th, "Chemicals in Products, Safeguarding the Environment and Human Health" was presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State in August 2004.

Pollution (Fines)

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will list companies fined for pollution incidents in each of the past five years, broken down by amount of fine; how many were fined more than once in that period; and what steps are taken to combat repeat offences.

Ben Bradshaw: A list of all companies convicted of and fined for pollution offences by the Environment Agency ("the Agency") in the calendar years 2000 to 2004 will be made available in the Library of the House.
	A list covering all companies convicted of and fined for pollution offences by the Agency more than once in the same five-year period will also be made available in the Library of the House.
	The Environment Agency uses protective, deterrent and incentive measures to tackle repeat offences.
	Protective measures include:
	enforcement notices to require companies to remedy technical defects; and
	increasing the level of oversight (such as monitoring, inspections and audits) at poor performing sites, including repeat offenders, through the use of risk-based regulation.
	Deterrent measures include:
	naming and shaming offenders in the Agency's annual "Spotlight on business" report (Spotlight 2004 will be published on 28 July 2005);
	increased charges for permits to reflect any additional oversight required;
	the Agency's Enforcement and Prosecution Policy which identifies repeat offenders and suggests firmer enforcement responses in instances of repeat offending; and
	fines and custodial sentences through the courts.
	Incentive measures include:
	recognising improved performance in the Agency's "Spotlight on business" report;
	reduced fees for better performers through risk-based charging schemes; and
	reduced oversight for operators that justify it.
	A list of successful prosecutions by local authorities from 2001–02 to 2003–04 will also be made available in the Library of the House. It is a matter for the individual local authorities to decide what steps to take regarding repeat offenders. The Local Government Association is a signatory to the Cabinet Office Enforcement Concordat.
	The Department is still collecting the data for successful prosecutions by local authorities in the year 2004–05, which will be published on the departmental website in December as part of the annual statistical report on the local authority pollution control systems.

Rivers

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what percentage of the length of rivers in England and Wales was accessible to the public in (a) 1997 and (b) 2004.

Jim Knight: According to the feasibility study "Improving Access for Canoeing on Inland Waters: A Study of the Feasibility of Access Agreements", published in May 2004 the lengths of water for canoeing on canals, rivers with public navigation rights and rivers with formal access agreements in England total over 5,000 km (34 per cent. of the major river and canal network). We do not hold figures for 1997.
	Responsibility for promoting recreation in Wales, including access to rivers, lies with the National Assembly for Wales and the Welsh Assembly Government rather than with Defra.

Sickness Absence

David Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many days the Department has lost due to sickness in the past five years for which figures are available.

Jim Knight: Figures are available in the annual report "Analysis of Sickness Absence in the Civil Service" published by the Cabinet Office, the most recent of which (for calendar year 2003) was announced by ministerial statement on 1 November 2004 and copies placed in the Libraries of the House.
	Reports are also available via the Cabinet Office website at: http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/management_information/conditions_of_service/caje/publications/index.asp#sickness.
	As Defra was formed in 2001, figures are only available for 2002 and 2003, and are summarised in the following table.
	
		
			  Column A: Average days absent per staff year Column B: Total staff years Total days absence. (column A X column B) 
		
		
			 2003 8.3 7,285 60,465 
			 2002 8.7 10,320 89,784 
		
	
	Defra is committed to the effective management of sickness absence and introduced a new policy for sickness absence management in December 2004, which introduced many of the recommendations of the recently published report "Managing Sickness Absence in the Public Sector".

Waste and Emissions Trading Act

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs under what circumstances her Department may decide not to fine a local authority which failed to meet its landfill allowance requirements under the Waste and Emissions Trading Act 2003.

Ben Bradshaw: The Secretary of State has the power under section 26(1)(c) of the Waste and Emissions Trading Act 2003 (the "WET Act") to waive financial penalties for an authority that exceeds its landfill allowances. The Secretary of State's policy in relation to the exercise of these powers is set out in a guidance document available on the Defra website http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/localauth/lats/pdf/lats-s26guide.pdf.
	In summary, the Secretary of State's policy is to be very selective about the exercise of her powers under section 26(1)(c) (ii). In general, she will only waive a financial penalty in circumstances where it can be demonstrated that an authority's failure to meet its duty under section 9(1) of the WET Act was primarily due to circumstances beyond the authority's control.

Waste Disposal

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much of the (a) paper, (b) plastic, (c) glass, (d) aluminium and (e) steel waste collected in London in 2004 was (i) reprocessed within London, (ii) reprocessed in the UK but outside London and (iii) exported for reprocessing; and to which countries such material was exported.

Ben Bradshaw: Defra does not collect information on the amount of paper, plastic, glass, aluminium and steel collected in London which is then reprocessed within London or reprocessed in the UK but outside London. In general, these wastes would be classified as non-hazardous and their notification of export for reprocessing is not required unless specific countries of destination have made a request to the European Commission for additional controls. In these cases notification to the Environment Agency would be required. No such notifications were made to the Environment Agency during 2004.
	Through their contractors, local authorities will know to which destinations these materials are sent and the quantities involved so that they can ensure that they are complying with the requirements of the duty of care i.e. that the material is being transported by properly licensed waste carriers, delivered to an authorised person and that the relevant documents, such as a waste transfer note, are retained by them for the prescribed period.

Energy Suppliers (Customer Advice)

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what procedures are in place to monitor the quality of advice provided by energy suppliers to their domestic customers; what formal qualifications are required of persons providing such advice; and what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the provision of such advice.

Angela Smith: The Northern Ireland Authority for Energy Regulation ("NIAER") monitors the provision by Northern Ireland Electricity (NIE) and Phoenix Natural Gas of energy efficiency advice to customers through the published annual reviews of its social action plans.
	Basic advice on the efficient use of electricity is provided by Northern Ireland Electricity's call handlers who attend regular training sessions provided by the Energy Saving Trust ("EST") Advice Centre, and EAGA Partnership Ltd. which has been contracted by the Department for Social Development to administer the warm homes scheme. In addition, Northern Ireland Electricity's team of field service representatives provide advice to customers in their homes. The team members are required to obtain the City and Guilds 6176 Energy Awareness qualification.
	Basic advice on the efficient use of gas is provided by the call handlers in Phoenix Natural Gas who are trained internally. This advice is also provided by Phoenix Natural Gas sales staff who are required to obtain the City and Guilds 6176 Energy Awareness qualification.
	Calls received by Northern Ireland Electricity and Phoenix Natural Gas call handlers can also be referred to the EST advice centre. The centre has signed up to the Energy Advice Providers' Code of Practice and all EST advice centre staff are required to obtain the City and Guilds 6176 Energy Awareness qualification.
	The NIAER is satisfied that the advice provided by Northern Ireland Electricity, Phoenix Natural Gas and the EST advice centre to domestic customers is of good quality and complies with best practice in using energy more efficiently.

Hospital Chaplaincies

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how members of churches other than the four main churches are provided for by way of hospital chaplaincies at each hospital in Northern Ireland.

Shaun Woodward: Each HSS Trust has appointed chaplains from the Roman Catholic, Presbyterian, Church of Ireland and Methodist churches to provide pastoral support and other services in each Trust hospital. Hospital chaplaincy services provided by Trusts for members of other denominations are set out in the following table.
	
		Hospital chaplaincies
		
			 HSS Trust Service 
		
		
			 Altnagelvin HSS Trust The Methodist chaplains provide a service for other denominations. 
			 Armagh and Dungannon HSS Trust At St. Luke's, Longstone and Mullinure hospitals, the Methodist chaplains provide a service for other denominations in the first instance. If requested to do so, the Trust organizes specific religious attendances for members of a non-Christian Church or faith. 
			 Belfast City Hospital HSS Trust The Methodist Chaplain makes an initial visit to patients who do not belong to one of the four main churches. If requested to do so, the Methodist Chaplain would liaise with the appropriate faith leader to ensure that patients receive the necessary pastoral support. 
			 Causeway HSS Trust The Methodist Chaplain is responsible for co-ordinating the pastoral needs of those patients who do not belong to one of the four main denominations. Causeway Hospital Chapel is interdenominational reflecting a Christian ethos. Patients who are not Christian, or who do not practise any religion and who do not wish to use the Chapel, can use a quiet room for reflection as organised by the Ward Manager. 
			 Craigavon Area Hospital Group Trust The Methodist Chaplain has responsibility for the care of members of other religious groups who do not fall within the four main denominations. 
			 Craigavon and Banbridge Community HSS Trust Within the Psychiatric Unit, which is situated on Craigavon Area Hospital Group Trust site, all Wards have contact numbers for those churches other than the four main churches. The Psychiatric Unit avails of the services provided by Craigavon Area Hospital Group Trust, such as the Church facility, which is a multi-faith church. The Trust also facilitates requests from patients within the Psychiatric Unit, who wish to have contact with their own Minister. 
			 Down Lisburn HSS Trust The Methodist Chaplain provides a service for other denominations and is the link for patients and their spiritual provider. 
			 Foyle HSS Trust If an individual requires the assistance of a church outside the four main denominations, hospital staff at Stradreagh, Gransha or Waterside Hospitals would make contact with the local church. 
			 Homefirst If requested, any of the four chaplains at Holy well hospital would provide the initial link between patients from other denominations or religious faiths and their cleric/faith leader. 
			 Mater Hospital HSS Trust If a patient is from a church other than the four main churches, the Trust asks the patient if they wish to contact a chaplain, or if they wish the Trust to do this on their behalf. For any other issues, the Trust involves the Patient Support Officer. 
			 Newry and Mourne HSS Trust The Methodist chaplain makes an initial visit to patients who do not belong to one of the four main churches. On request, the Methodist Chaplain would liaise with the appropriate faith leader to ensure that patients receive the necessary pastoral support. 
			 North and West Belfast HSS Trust The Methodist minister looks after the spiritual needs of patients who do not belong to one of the four main churches. 
			 Royal Group of Hospitals HSS Trust The Royal hospitals chaplaincy service accommodates all Christian and non-Christian faiths. For patients of non-Christian denominations, the Trust's Chaplains liaise with faith representatives in the community to ensure that patients obtain support from their individual faith leaders. The Trust also provides a quiet room for visitors and patients for Christian and non-Christian prayer. Prayer mats, copies of the Koran, Hebrew scriptures, Hebrew Bible and washing facilities are also available. 
			 South and East Belfast HSS Trust The hospital administration and nursing departments contact other clerics/faith leaders as required for other denominations. 
			 Sperrin Lakeland HSS Trust The Methodist Chaplain looks after patients with "unknown" or "other" religions. 
			 Ulster Community and Hospitals Trust The Methodist Chaplain deals with all other denominations outside of the main churches. Contact details for the local Rabbi for the Jewish community and a representative for Jehovah Witness are available if they are required. 
			 United Hospitals Trust In Whiteabbey, Mid Ulster, Antrim and Braid Valley hospitals, the Methodist Chaplain deals with all denominations outside of the main churches. The Presbyterian Chaplain provides this service at Moyle Hospital.

Hospitals (Complaints)

Peter Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many complaints have been made about the quality of care and treatment in hospitals in Northern Ireland in the last five years, broken down by hospital.

Shaun Woodward: Information on the number of complaints made about the quality of care and treatment is not available by hospital. However, information is available by Trust and is detailed in the table. The Trusts are categorised according to whether they are Hospital Trusts, Community Trusts, Mixed (Hospital and Community) Trusts, or "other" Trusts.
	
		Number of complaints received by each Health and Social Services trustrecorded against "Treatment and Care (quality)" category, by type of Trust and year
		
			 Health and Social Services Trust 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05(6) 
		
		
			 Belfast City Hospital 30 48 32 61 41 
			 Green Park 18 14 4 5 16 
			 Mater Infirmorum 22 27 37 27 27 
			 Royal Group of Hospitals 114 109 105 89 132 
			 United Hospitals 77 53 79 72 96 
			 Craigavon Area Group 84 71 55 41 66 
			 Altnagelvin Group 51 65 42 37 47 
			 Total Hospital Trusts 396 387 354 332 425 
			 North and West Belfast 6 11 17 11 19 
			 South and East Belfast 31 28 35 43 49 
			 Homefirst 22 24 42 104 37 
			 Craigavon and Banbridge 4 2 3 4 22 
			 Foyle 7 5 11 13 15 
			 Total Community Trusts 70 70 108 175 142 
			 Down Lisburn 66 45 56 52 53 
			 Ulster Community and Hospitals 100 71 59 54 54 
			 Causeway 44 66 73 59 62 
			 Armagh and Dungannon 22 22 9 18 14 
			 Newry and Mourne 22 33 23 27 27 
			 Sperrin Lakeland 25 20 18 19 19 
			 Total Mixed Trusts 279 257 238 229 229 
			 Northern Ireland Ambulance Service 31 34 24 23 22 
			 Total Other Trusts 31 34 24 23 22 
			 Total Northern Ireland 776 748 724 759 818 
		
	
	(6) Figures for 2004–05 are provisional and may be subject to change.
	Source:
	CHS

Human Rights Commission

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what the (a) community, (b) religious and (c) political background is of the new appointees to the Human Rights Commission in Northern Ireland.

David Hanson: In accordance with the guidelines of the Office of the Commissioner for Pubic Appointments (OCPA), applicants for the position of chief commissioner and commissioner were asked to declare political activity undertaken in the last five years, as defined in eight categories.
	The press release of 16 June which announced the new chief commissioner and commissioners to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, set out this activity as follows:
	Professor Monica Me Williams—founder member of the NI Women's Coalition and was an MLA 1998–2003. Professor McWilliams indicated that she would step down from her involvement with the NI Women's Coalition.
	Professor Colin Harvey—Member of the Policy Committee of the SDLP from 2001–02, and has canvassed for the party in recent years.
	Jonathan Bell—Independent, then Democratic Unionist Party, Councillor on Craigavon Borough Council until May 2005. Since May 2005 Ards Borough Councillor, Democratic Unionist Party.
	Ann Hope—Canvassed on behalf of the Northern Ireland Women's Coalition at elections.
	Eamonn O'Neill—currently SDLP Councillor, Down Council (leader of SDLP group). Member of the Northern Ireland Assembly 1998–2003—Chaired the Assembly's Culture, Arts and Leisure Committee.
	Geraldine Rice—Alliance Party of Northern Ireland Councillor on Castlereagh Borough Council since 1989. Elected Deputy Mayor May 2005.
	The equal opportunities monitoring form completed by all candidates asked candidates to declare their background as being "of the Protestant community"; "of the Roman Catholic community" or neither "a Protestant or Roman Catholic community background".
	The community background of the seven commissioners and one chief commissioner as indicated in their forms is as follows:
	Protestant—three
	Roman Catholic—three
	Neither Protestant or Roman Catholic community background—two

Parliamentarians (State Benefits)

William McCrea: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what state benefits have been received by each of the Sinn Fein (a) members of the Legislative Assembly, (b) Members of Parliament and (c) Members of the European Parliament in the last 10 years.

David Hanson: We are unable to provide the information requested as it is personal data and its release would breach data protection principles.

Prosecution Service

Mark Durkan: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on plans for a Public Prosecution Service Office in Derry.

David Hanson: The procedure for the opening of the PPS Regional Offices is a phased "rollout" over a period beginning with the creation of the first PPS Pilot in December 2003 and completion by December 2006. A public procurement programme is in place to acquire suitable premises capable, in the case of Londonderry of accommodating some 60 staff. At this point a number of sites in the Londonderry area are being considered.
	The PPS Project Board intends to meet the December 2006 deadline for the completion of the PPS Rollout.

Public Transport (Violence)

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many (a) bus drivers and (b) railway employees in Northern Ireland have been the victim of offences of violence in each of the last 10 years.

Shaun Woodward: Translink has advised that the number of reported assaults against on-duty bus drivers over the past 10 years is as follows:
	
		Bus drivers
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 1995 48 
			 1996 90 
			 1997 89 
			 1998 97 
			 1999 75 
			 2000 64 
			 2001 78 
			 2002 72 
			 2003 40 
			 2004 25 
			 January to June 2005 11 
		
	
	Translink has advised that similar statistics relating to its railway employees are not available within the available timescale. I shall reply to the hon. Gentleman with that information as soon as possible.

Taxi Drivers (Violence)

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many taxi drivers in Northern Ireland have been the victim of offences of violence in each of the last 10 years.

Shaun Woodward: The information requested is only available from April 2001. The following table provides figures relating to the number of violent crimes (offences against the person, sexual offences, and robbery) in which the victim's occupation or victim type was given as "Taxi Driver". It should be noted that it is not known whether the taxi driver was actually working at the time of the offence, and therefore these figures do not provide an accurate reflection of how many taxi drivers have been attacked while working.
	
		
			  Number of incidents 
		
		
			 2001–02 115 
			 2002–03 137 
			 2003–04 89 
			 2004–05 101

Asbestos

Nick Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what advice he has received from the Health and Safety Commission concerning the implementation of the asbestos hazard management regulations; and what resources are being applied to the enforcement of the regulatory requirements for asbestos hazard management.

Margaret Hodge: In its annual report for 2004–05, the Health and Safety Commission reported that the campaign to raise awareness of the duty to manage asbestos continued in order to encourage increased compliance amongst dutyholders. One of the important elements of the campaign last year was the launch of the successful video "How are you managing?".
	Health and Safety Executive inspectors are working in a number of ways to encourage dutyholders to comply with the legal requirement to manage asbestos. These include visits to large organisations' head offices, site visits and presentations at events. The planned resource for this work in 2005–06 is similar that allocated in the preceding year when more than 1,000 visits were conducted. At the majority of these visits improvements were secured by the provision of advice but on at least 50 occasions enforcement notices were issued.

Carers Allowance

Jimmy Hood: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people are in receipt of carers allowance in (a) the UK, (b) Scotland and (c) the Lanark and Hamilton East constituency; and if he will make a statement.

Anne McGuire: The latest available information is that at 28 February 2005, some 436,820 people in Great Britain were receiving carer's allowance, of whom 42,330 were in Scotland. Details of the numbers of carer's allowance recipients in each parliamentary constituency in Scotland at that date are in the table. Information about the number of people receiving carer's allowance in Northern Ireland is a matter for the Northern Ireland Office.
	
		Carer's allowance: number of recipients in each parliamentary constituency in Scotland as at 28 February 2005
		
			 Constituency Numbers 
		
		
			 Aberdeen Central 225 
			 Aberdeen North 460 
			 Aberdeen South 310 
			 Airdrie and Shotts 835 
			 Angus 590 
			 Argyll and Bute 435 
			 Ayr 615 
			 Banff and Buchan 665 
			 Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross 540 
			 Carrick Cumnock and Doon Valley 1,010 
			 Central Fife 870 
			 Clydebank and Milngavie 635 
			 Clydesdale 840 
			 Coatbridge and Chryston 670 
			 Cumbernauld and Kilsyth 495 
			 Cunninghame North 630 
			 Cunninghame South 755 
			 Dumbarton 655 
			 Dumfries 645 
			 Dundee East 700 
			 Dundee West 620 
			 Dunfermline East 640 
			 Dunfermline West 450 
			 East Kilbride 560 
			 East Lothian 575 
			 Eastwood 500 
			 Edinburgh Central 320 
			 Edinburgh East and Musselburgh 630 
			 Edinburgh North and Leith 450 
			 Edinburgh Pentlands 485 
			 Edinburgh South 445 
			 Edinburgh West 455 
			 Falkirk East 650 
			 Falkirk West 630 
			 Galloway and Upper Nithsdale 765 
			 Glasgow Anniesland 870 
			 Glasgow Baillieston 1,010 
			 Glasgow Cathcart 620 
			 Glasgow Govan 570 
			 Glasgow Kelvin 350 
			 Glasgow Maryhill 760 
			 Glasgow Pollok 805 
			 Glasgow Rutherglen 695 
			 Glasgow Shettleston 880 
			 Glasgow Springburn 870 
			 Gordon 410 
			 Greenock and Inverclyde 550 
			 Hamilton North and Bellshill 665 
			 Hamilton South 720 
			 Inverness East Nairn and Lochaber 615 
			 Kilmarnock and Loudoun 775 
			 Kirkcaldy 585 
			 Linlithgow 645 
			 Livingston 755 
			 Midlothian 555 
			 Moray 590 
			 Motherwell and Wishaw 690 
			 North East Fife 370 
			 North Tayside 495 
			 Ochil 700 
			 Orkney and Shetland 200 
			 Paisley North 530 
			 Paisley South 515 
			 Perth 550 
			 Ross Skye and Inverness West 560 
			 Roxburgh and Berwickshire 395 
			 Stirling 490 
			 Strathkelvin and Bearsden 425 
			 Tweeddale Ettrick and Lauderdale 335 
			 West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine 330 
			 West Renfrewshire 475 
			 Western Isles 215 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Figures are rounded to the nearest 5.
	2. From November 2002, the methodology for producing these figures was changed to allow statistics to be published much sooner. This has resulted in a small increase in the reported caseload. This is because some cases which have actually terminated but have not yet been updated on the computer system are now included.
	Source:
	Information Directorate, 100 per cent. data.

Child Maintenance

Jimmy Hood: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what research his Department has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated on the financial effects on the first family when the non-resident parent has a child born to his new partner under child maintenance arrangements; what effects this has on child maintenance payments; and if he will make a statement.

James Plaskitt: The Department has not commissioned any research that specifically investigates the financial impact suffered by the first family when a non-resident parent has a child born to his new partner and any subsequent impacts upon child maintenance.
	Research has been commissioned to examine factors affecting non-resident parent compliance with maintenance assessments, "National Survey of Child Support Agency Clients", Nick Wikeley, CDS 2001, a copy of which is in the Library. This found that the partnering status of a non-resident parent is a factor. Non-resident parents who have re-partnered or remarried tend to be less likely to comply with maintenance assessments.

Child Support Agency

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his latest estimate is of the backlog of uncleared Child Support Agency cases for (a) each quarter from March 2003 to June 2005 and (b) each month from April 2004 to June 2005; and if he will make a statement.

James Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Mike Isaac to Mr. David Laws, dated 21 July 2005
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive. As he is currently on leave I am responding on his behalf.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what his latest estimate is of the backlog of uncleared Child Support Agency cases for (a) each quarter from March 2003 to June 2005 and (b) each month from April 2004 to June 2005; and if he will make a statement.
	In its response to the Work and Pensions Select Committee on the performance of the Child Support Agency, the Government agreed that the management information for the new scheme was not as robust or as comprehensive as it needed to be. It went on to state that the Agency was confident that by 1 November 2005 the management information would be improved and on a par with old scheme information.
	Progress is being made to achieve improvements in the quality of new scheme information and, from January 2005, more robust management information is available in respect of the Agency's intake, clearances and work-on-hand position as recorded on the IT system. Consequently, I am currently only able to provide reliable new scheme information from this point forward.
	
		New scheme application work on hand
		
			 Month (2005) New scheme 
		
		
			 January 259,000 
			 February 265,000 
			 March 266,000 
			 April 267,000 
			 May 265,000 
			 June 263,000 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. An application is counted as "cleared" when a maintenance calculation has been carried out and a charging schedule set up, or it has been closed, or it has been established that it is not a valid application (because it is subject to a reduced benefit decision, is good cause, or is in actual fact a change of circumstance on an existing case).
	2. Work in hand in this context is the totality of all cases yet to be cleared, as defined above.
	3. Figures rounded to nearest 1,000.
	I am sorry that we are not able to be more helpful at present.

Child Support Agency

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many requests to increase staffing levels have been made to each Child Support Agency business unit director, broken down by area; how many requests were accepted; and for how many staff in each case.

James Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Mike Isaac to Mr. David Laws, dated 21 July 2005
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many requests to increase staffing levels have been made to each Child Support Agency business unit director broken down by area; how many requests were accepted; and for how many staff in each case.
	I am afraid that the specific information you have asked for is not available. However, I thought it might be helpful if I explain that the Child Support Agency plan staffing on an annual basis, setting out workforce plans by business unit/territory. These workforce plans are underpinned by recruitment plans based on anticipated wastage of staff calculated by looking at historical leaver data. The plans are monitored monthly and reviewed on a quarterly basis to take account of any business changes.
	As a result of the Departmental Spending Review 2004 the Agency headcount target for March 2006 was increased by 1,561 from 8,000 to 9,561 (Dataview counting methodology).
	From April 2005 the Agency began counting staffing in line with the agreed Cabinet Office Mandate counting methodology. This excludes staff on maternity pay from the staff in post count and accounts for an approximate 1 per cent. reduction in staffing totals. As a result the March 2006 headcount target was adjusted accordingly to 9388.
	From the beginning of the 2005/6 operational year the Child Support Agency moved from a business unit structure to a new "territorial" structure. The table below outlines the target staffing distribution to reflect the increase of staffing and the new territorial structure.
	
		
			 Territorial structure Authorised headcount March 2006 
		
		
			 Northern Territory 3,145 
			 Southern Territory 3,915 
			 National Helpline 493 
			 Enforcement 610 
			 HQ and Support Services 1,211 
			 Agency contribution to Independent Case  Examiner's staffing 14 
			 Total 9,388 
		
	
	I am sorry we could not be more helpful but I hope that you have found this answer useful.

Child Support Agency

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what records he keeps of call backs (a) promised and (b) made by Child Support Agency staff.

James Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member.
	Letter from Mike Isaac to Mr. Laws, dated 21 July 2005
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive. As he is currently on leave I am replying on his behalf.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what records he keeps of callbacks (a) promised and (b) made by Child Support Agency staff.
	The Agency keeps clerical monthly statistics on callbacks generated. We are in the process of automating the process to improve the quality and accuracy of these records.
	However I can tell you that all our staff receive customer service training and are instructed to call customers back when asked to do so or when they perceive that a call may be lengthy.
	I am sorry that I could not be more helpful at this time.

Child Support Agency

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what systems have been established to monitor the quality of Child Support Agency staff responses to telephone calls.

James Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member.
	Letter from Mike Isaac to Mr. Laws, dated 21 July 2005
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive. As he is currently on leave I am responding on his behalf.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what systems have been established to monitor the quality of Child Support Agency staff responses to telephone calls.
	The Agency has in place a number of measures to monitor the quality of calls. National Helpline team leaders can either listen in to "live" calls from a remote location or to tape recordings of closed calls. They score calls for quality and identify any training needs, which are then addressed. The tapes are also used in regular coaching sessions with staff.
	The National Helpline conducts a Department for Work and Pensions approved quarterly customer survey. The resultant feedback from our customers is used to develop improvement plans. Regular surveys are also carried out to monitor the accuracy of the technical information given to customers.
	I hope you find this answer useful.

Child Support Agency

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many (a) serious complaints and (b) complaints about Child Support Agency (CSA) payments have been received by CSA staff in each of the last five years; and how serious complaints are (i) identified and (ii) defined.

James Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Mike Isaac to Mr. David Laws dated 21 July 2005
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive. As he is currently on leave I am responding on his behalf.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many (a) serious complaints and (b) complaints about Child Support Agency payments have been received by Child Support Agency staff; and how serious complaints are identified and defined.
	I have provided the number of complaints received in the Agency in the table below covering a 14 month period to May 2005. I cannot supply the number of complaints about payments as the information is not sufficiently categorised to provide that level of detail.
	We consider that any complaint we receive to be a "serious complaint", and we do not have a separate definition of "serious". We operate a three-tier complaints process. A Stage 1 complaint is the first we receive from a client either in writing or over the telephone and is dealt with by a Complaints Resolution Team located within each of our Business Units. A Stage 2 complaint is one where the client complains to the Business Unit's Area Director following a response at Stage 1. Most complaints are settled at Stage 1 or 2 but if a client is unhappy with the Area Director's response they can write directly to the Chief Executive. This constitutes a Stage 3 complaint.
	At each level of the complaints process clients are advised as to how they can escalate their complaint should they remain dissatisfied with the reply they receive.
	Once the three-tiered process has been completed the client can contact the Independent Case Examiner [if they remain dissatisfied]. The Independent Case Examiner is external to the Agency and acts as an impartial adjudicator in respect of the complaints which are appropriate for her involvement.
	In addition to this process, a client can complain directly to their Member of Parliament who can refer the complaint on their behalf to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration.
	
		Total complaints received March 2005 Year to Date (YTD),and May 2005 (YTD)
		
			 Child Support Agency complaints April 2004-March 2005 April 2005-May 2005 
		
		
			 Total agency cases (8)1,375,000 (9)1,463,000 
			 Stage 1 39,783 6,534 
			 Stage 2 5,580 1,053 
			 Stage 3 2,549 349 
			 Member of Parliament to chief executive 5,787 893 
			 Member of Parliament to business unit 8,871 1,512 
			 Treat official 1,108 210 
			 Total complaints 63,678 10,551 
			 Complaints received by independent case examiner 2,367 n/a 
			 Complaints accepted by independent case examiner 1,259 n/a 
		
	
	n/a=not available
	(8) As at 31 March 2005.
	(9) As at 31 May 2005.
	Notes:
	1. Member of Parliament to chief executive, Member of Parliament to business unit and treat official complaints are outside the 3-tier client complaints process.
	2. Treat official complaints are those received by a Minister's private office but referred for initial consideration by an official of the agency.
	3. Complaints received by the independent case examiner: These include complaints where the agency had not issued a response by or on behalf of the chief executive so the independent case examiner could not accept the complaint. The figure also includes complaints on legislation etc where the independent case examiner cannot accept the complaint.
	4. Complaints accepted by the independent case examiner: These are the complaints where the complainant has received a response by or on behalf of the chief executive.
	I am sorry if this answer is not all that you may have wished for but I hope it has proved useful to you.

Disabled People (Employer Insurance)

Martin Caton: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  if he will assess the merits of providing financial assistance to companies that incur additional insurance costs because they employ disabled people;
	(2)  what recent estimate his Department has made of the numbers of disabled people (a) refused employment and (b) dismissed because employers claim that insurance costs are prohibitive;
	(3)  what assessment his Department has made of the accuracy of risk assessments undertaken by insurance companies that increase insurance premiums when disabled people are employed.

Anne McGuire: The Department for Work and Pensions does not intend to make an assessment of the merits of providing financial assistance to companies that incur additional insurance costs because they employ disabled people. The Government do not provide funding to employers to enable them to meet their obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. In fulfilling their duty to make reasonable adjustments, employers are required only to make adjustments that are reasonable for them to make given all the circumstances of the case. Factors such as the cost of the adjustment and the employer's available resources are taken into account in determining what is reasonable.
	No data is held on people who have been refused employment or dismissed because employers claim that insurance costs are prohibitive. Therefore the Department for Work and Pensions has not made any estimates of the numbers of disabled people who have been affected in these circumstances. If insurance costs are "prohibitive" it may be unreasonable for an employer to pay the higher premium. Furthermore, an unacceptably high premium, or a refusal by an insurance company to provide cover for the disabled individual, may provide grounds for the employer to justify discriminatory action against the insurance company.
	The Department has made no estimate of the accuracy of risk assessments undertaken by insurance companies that increase premiums when disabled people are employed. The Government are not in a position to intervene in the decisions of insurance companies when determining whether or not to offer insurance. "An Insurer's Guide to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995", published by the Association of British Insurers includes guidance to the insurance industry on the use of relevant information and data in underwriting and we would expect insurance companies to follow this guide. The guide has been endorsed by the Disability Rights Commission which has undertaken to monitor its effects to help the industry improve its performance. The Disability Rights Commission proposes to begin research this summer.

Group 4

Doug Henderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much was spent by his Department and public bodies and agencies for which he is responsible on security contracts with Group 4 Securicor in 2004–05; and if he will list (a) the nature and location of services provided and (b) the start and end dates of such contracts.

Margaret Hodge: The Department and its public bodies or agencies has had no expenditure with Group 4 Securicor on security contracts in the past year.

Honours

Greg Pope: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many officials currently in the Department received honours in the recent Queen's Birthday Honours List; and at what rank of honour.

Anne McGuire: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. Hutton) on 22 June 2005, Official Report, column 1059.

Housing Benefit

Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many housing benefit claims were outstanding on average in each year since 1997, broken down by region.

James Plaskitt: The information is in the table.
	
		Average number of claims outstanding in each Government Office Region; 2000–01 to 2004–05
		
			 Government Office Region 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 
		
		
			 East Midlands 52,414 31,346 34,377 50,943 18,764 
			 Eastern 66,383 47,811 31,817 52,888 42,869 
			 London 154,426 75,947 131,966 89,734 67,282 
			 North-east 38,189 35,045 27,555 58,937 10,771 
			 North-west 140,411 38,100 75,383 49,153 29,240 
			 Scotland 67,348 62,659 63,599 62,680 29,474 
			 South-east 117,054 63,838 39,174 88,327 27,539 
			 South-west 85,895 32,218 36,425 153,382 21,492 
			 Wales 102,592 27,980 39,297 51,279 24,776 
			 West Midlands 60,002 31,892 45,498 76,722 29,432 
			 Yorks and Humberside 122,778 73,130 71,210 292,469 28,311 
			 National total 1,007,492 519,966 596,299 1,026,513 329,948 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Not all LAs have returned data in every quarter, so the reported figures are the weighted averages of those that have returned figures.
	2. Local authorities may not use the same method of counting.
	3. Data is not available prior to 2000.
	4. Prior to 2004–05 the count included both new and renewal claims, after this point existing claims were no longer renewed.
	Source:
	Local Authority (LA) quarterly statistical returns

Housing Benefit

Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the cost of administering housing benefit was in each year since 1997.

James Plaskitt: The cost of administering housing benefit cannot be separated from the cost of administering council tax benefit; joint claims are usually administered together.
	The available information is in the table.
	
		Costs to local authorities of administering housing benefit and council tax benefit for the years 1997–98 to 2003–04;Great Britain
		
			  Million 
		
		
			 1997–98 516 
			 1998–99 526 
			 1999–2000 597 
			 2000–01 613 
			 2001–02 654 
			 2002–03 693 
			 2003–04 765 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. These figures should not be regarded as the exact cost because it is not always possible for local authorities to accurately separate their HB/CTB administration costs from other expenditure.
	2. 2003–04 is the latest year for which information is available.
	Source:
	Local authority reported expenditure.

Incapacity Benefit

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the projected numbers of people on incapacity benefit are for (a) 2010–11, (b) 2020–21, (c) 2030–31, (d) 2040–41 and (e) 2050–51, broken down by rate of benefit.

Margaret Hodge: holding answer 5 July 2005
	Between 1979 and 1997 the number of people receiving incapacity benefit rose from 700,000 to 2.5 million—the equivalent of an additional 2,000 inactive people every single week. However, between November 1997 and November 2004 inflows declined by around 30 per cent. This has resulted in the slowing down of the growth in the caseload since 1997. In fact in the year to February 2005 the caseload fell by 29,000—a small but significant change, reflecting the success of our management of the economy and the success of our welfare to work policies.
	Projections of the number of claimants ignore the progress we have made since 1997. At least a million claimants (the Shaw Trust estimate 1.5 million) receiving incapacity benefit say they expect to work in the future, given the right support. We are already providing this support in the Pathways to Work pilots, which are doubling their recorded job entries, but we want to do even more and that's why we will be publishing a Green Paper in the autumn outlining our proposals. Our ambition is to move a million people off incapacity benefit and into work.
	The available information is in the following table.
	
		Projected incapacity benefit claimants in the UK for years shown, broken down by benefit rate.
		
			  2010–11 2020–21 2030–31 2040–41 2050–51 
		
		
			 Invalidity benefit—basic 230 74 11 (13)— 0 
			 Incapacity benefit—short-term lower rate 100 113 108 107 108 
			 Incapacity benefit—short-term higher rate 99 118 117 115 119 
			 Incapacity benefit—long-term 1,263 1,783 1,892 1,864 1,951 
			 Incapacity benefit—earnings-related 194 65 9 0 0 
		
	
	(13) Indicates figures below 500.
	Notes:
	1. Figures are rounded to the nearest thousand and shown in thousands.
	2. These projections do not take account of any future changes to the welfare system.
	Source:
	DWP projections based on figures underlying HM Treasury's Annex A in the Budget Report.

Incapacity Benefit

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what plans he has to (a) pilot and (b) evaluate the effects of benefit sanctions within incapacity benefit; and what research he has commissioned into the effect on incapacity benefit recipients of being sanctioned for failure to attend a work-focused interview;
	(2)  pursuant to his Answer of 22 June 2005, Official Report, column 1076W, on Pathways to Work, what the diagnoses were of those sanctioned; and what proportion were receiving incapacity benefit for mental health conditions.

Anne McGuire: People claiming incapacity benefit in Pathways to Work areas may be sanctioned for failing to attend or take part in a work focused interview (WFI) with a Jobcentre Plus personal adviser. Specific information on the diagnosis of those sanctioned is not available.
	There have been an insufficient number of sanctions to warrant a specific study of their effects. However, the Department is regularly monitoring the numbers and is currently reviewing priorities for future evaluation. As part of the evaluation of the Pathways pilots the Department has commissioned studies to examine the experiences of incapacity benefit customers and personal advisers, including sanctions imposed.

Incapacity Benefit

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his estimate is of the proportion of incapacity benefit claimants in the UK who were aged over (a) 40, (b) 50, (c) 55, (d) 60 and (e) 65 in (i) 1985–86, (ii) 1990–91, (iii) 2000–01 and (iv) the latest year for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement.

Anne McGuire: The information is not available in the format requested. The available information is in the table.
	
		Sickness benefit (SB), invalidity benefit (IVB), severe disability allowance (SDA) and incapacity benefit (IB) claimants in Great Britain by age group at dates shown
		
			  Year ending Quarter ending 
			  April 1996 March 1991 February 2001 November 2004 
		
		
			 All ages 1,398,200 1,972,000 2,692,100 2,696,500 
			  
			 Under 40 327,900 432,500 780,500 782,600 
			 Percentage 23.45 21.93 28.99 29.02 
			  
			 40–49 230,600 346,900 587,700 638,800 
			 Percentage 16.49 17.59 21.83 23.69 
			  
			 50–54 173,000 257,900 438,800 391,600 
			 Percentage 12.37 13.08 16.30 14.52 
			  
			 55–59 250,600 345,500 492,000 528,300 
			 Percentage 17.92 17.52 18.28 19.59 
			  
			 60–64 316,800 367,500 365,700 325,100 
			 Percentage 22.66 18.64 13.58 12.06 
			  
			 65 and over 99,300 221,700 27,400 30,100 
			 Percentage 7.10 11.24 1.02 1.12 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Figures are rounded to the nearest hundred. Totals may not sum due to rounding.
	2. "Claimant" figures include all credits only cases.
	3. Sickness/invalidity benefit was replaced by incapacity benefit in April 1995.
	Source:
	Information directorate 1 per cent. sample for 1986 and 1991. 5 per cent. sample for 2001 and 2004.

Local Housing Allowance Scheme

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the most recent average waiting time for a new claim to be assessed under the Local Housing Allowance scheme is in each of the original nine Pathfinder authorities; and what the average waiting time was for a housing benefit claim to be assessed in each of these authorities in each year since 1997.

James Plaskitt: The available information is in the following table.
	
		Average housing benefit (rent allowance) claim processing times in local housing allowance pathfinder authorities.
		
			  2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05(14) 
		
		
			 Brighton and Hove 79.77 n/a 30.7 29.99 34.02 
			 Blackpool 44.81 44.13 47.96 31.42 26.05 
			 Leeds 47.84 36.76 41.54 31.01 90.08 
			 Lewisham 55.41 44.74 43.89 44.29 34.06 
			 Teignbridge 41.51 37.63 36.22 40.17 31.8 
			 Edinburgh n/a 77.79 78.41 98.54 89.44 
			 Conwy 79.69 67.69 62.5 40.34 31.47 
			 Coventry 61.9 65.64 65.18 53.99 53.77 
			 NE Lincolnshire 32.89 49.38 64.59 48.96 35.76 
		
	
	n/a = not available.
	(14) First three quarters.
	Notes:
	1. Average processing times are given in days.
	2. Data is collected on rent allowance claims which includes, but is not exclusive to, the local housing allowance.
	3. Data on average processing times is not available prior March 2000 when the best value performance indicators were introduced
	4. The increase in processing times in Leeds have been caused by a change of IT system.
	Source: Local Authority MIS data.

Maternity Pay

Jimmy Hood: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  how much employers spent in (a) the UK and (b) Scotland on statutory maternity pay in (i) 2002, (ii) 2003, (iii) 2004 and (iv) 2005; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what the cost of statutory maternity pay has been to employers in the UK in 2005; and if he will make a statement.

Anne McGuire: Information is not available for Scotland. The available information, which is on a UK basis, is in the following table.
	
		UK expenditure on statutory maternity pay by employers -- £ million
		
			  Outturn Forecast 
			  2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 
		
		
			 Initial employer expenditure 840 1,208 1,319 1,357 
			 Amount recovered through national insurance deductions 785 1,129 1,233 1,268 
			 Net employer expenditure 55 79 86 89 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Expenditure information is on an accruals basis.
	2. Outturn information is available for the financial year 2002–03. Data for other financial years are forecasts.
	3. Although statutory maternity pay is originally paid for by the employer, they are entitled to receive a reimbursement of 92 per cent. of their costs through deductions to national insurance contributions. Small employers, in addition to the 92 per cent. reimbursement, receive Small Employers Relief of 12.5 per cent. which brings their total reimbursement to 104.5 per cent. As a result the final net expenditure paid by the employer is much lower than their initial outlay.
	4. There is a large increase in expenditure between 2002–03 and 2003–04 because the number of weeks a woman is entitled to claim SMP rose from 18 to 26.
	Source:
	Source of forecast information is the Government Actuary Department's forecasting model for Budget 2005.

Ministerial Taskforce for Health, Safety and Productivity

Nick Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when the Ministerial Taskforce for Health, Safety and Productivity last met; and what progress it has made in reducing days lost through sickness and absence in the public sector.

Margaret Hodge: The Ministerial Task Force on Health, Safety and Productivity met on 22 June and 20 July 2005. The Task Force produced a report on "Managing Sickness Absence in the Public Sector" in December 2004. It has since reviewed how its recommendations are being implemented within the civil service.
	A number of pilots to test effectiveness of management interventions and develop best practice are now in place, including in my own Department. Some are already showing positive results. For example in HM Prison Service there has been a fall in sickness rates of 4.7 per cent. overall in one year.
	The Task Force will be agreeing realistic targets for the public sector and monitoring progress.

New Deal

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people have started on a new deal scheme more than once.

Margaret Hodge: The new deal has been successful in helping more than 1.3 million people into work. 577,020 people have started the new deal more than once. There are several possible reasons for this. In a dynamic, shifting labour market, it is inevitable that some people entering the new deal will return to unemployment. Equally a person may cease their involvement on the new deal because they move from jobseekers' allowance onto another benefit or stop claiming at all. These people may subsequently reclaim and return to the new deal. However, the new deal is a long-term investment to make a real difference to the lives of its participants. Those who do return to benefits have still added to their skills, confidence and experience, making it easier for them to find a job in the future.

Pathways Programme

Jimmy Hood: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will make a statement on the effectiveness of the Pathways programme since its introduction in (a) helping people on incapacity benefit to obtain employment and (b) providing help to disabled people to manage their condition.

Margaret Hodge: We have early signs that the Pathways to Work approach is having a positive impact, providing a framework of high-quality active support for people on incapacity benefits. To the end of March 2005 there have been around 13,400 Pathways job entries and there is increasingly clear evidence of a significant increase in the proportions of new claimants leaving benefit.
	In our Pathways pilot areas we have achieved an increase of about 8 per cent. in the number of people who move off incapacity benefit within six months when compared to non pilot areas. The increase exceeds our initial expectations.
	Around 20 per cent. of all those attending work-focused interviews (WFIs) take up one of the forms of back-to-work help available in Pathways areas.
	The element of Pathways designed to provide help to disabled people to manage their condition is the NHS Condition Management Programme which has been particularly welcomed by both customers and personal advisers. There have been 4,900 starts to Condition Management Programmes since their introduction in October 2003. Some of those whose health condition improved cited the Condition Management Programme as a contributing factor.
	The Pathways to Work pilots are operating in seven areas and we will add 14 additional pilot areas from October 2005 onwards.
	The latest Pathways statistics, "Pathways to Work Performance and Analysis", have been placed in the Library.

Pensioners (Stroud)

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many pensioners there were in the Stroud constituency in the last year for which figures are available; and how many were in receipt of pension credit.

James Plaskitt: The most recent estimates of pensioner population by parliamentary constituency are contained in "Census 2001—Census Area Statistics for Parliamentary Constituencies in England and Wales", which is available in the Library. Information on numbers of households and individuals in receipt of pension credit in each constituency at 31 March 2005 is contained in the most recent quarterly pension credit progress report, which was published on 20 June. A copy of the report is in the Library.

Procurement

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what value for money procurement savings were identified and what reduction in civil service posts occurred in his Department in 2004–05.

Anne McGuire: In pre-Budget report 2004 the Chancellor reported OGC value for money gains in central civil government procurement for 2003–04 of £2 billion. OGC value for money procurement gains for 2004–05 are being calculated and will be published in the 2005 Treasury Autumn Performance Report.
	In Budget 2005 the Chancellor announced a headcount reduction of 12,500 posts by the end of 2004–05, towards the Government's target of a gross reduction of 84,000 civil service and administrative posts by 2008. The number of posts in the Department for Work and Pensions reduced by 9,970 during 2004–05.

Sign Language and Lip-speakers

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many (a) sign language interpreters and (b) lip-speakers were (i) in training, (ii) employed and (iii) unemployed in the UK in each year since 1997.

Anne McGuire: Information on the number of sign language interpreters who were employed and unemployed in each year since 1997 is not available. Employment statistics are drawn from the Labour Force Survey. However, there is no question in the survey that relates to whether or not respondents can lip read, or are sign language interpreters.
	I understand from the Department for Education and Skills that the information on the respective numbers in training could be calculated only at disproportionate cost.

Tax Credits

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will make a statement on the new tax credits system developed by Affinity for his Department; how it interfaces with the main tax credit system; and what the estimated (a) cost and (b) timescale is.

James Plaskitt: When the new tax credits commenced in 2003 a new data exchange mechanism was introduced to support the electronic exchange of data between the Department for Work and Pensions and Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs services (the "Tax Credits Gateway"). The Department also has enquiry facilities for tax credits award details ("View Only Access") and IT to support electronic applications and reporting of changes of circumstances ("e-portal").
	Delivery, in partnership with HM Revenue and Customs is expected to be completed during summer 2006 with a planned cost of £114 million.

Alcohol-related Deaths

Mark Lancaster: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many deaths in which the primary cause was alcohol there were in Milton Keynes in each of the last five years.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from Len Cook to Mr. Mark Lancaster, dated 21 July 2005
	As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking how many deaths in which the primary cause was alcohol there were in Milton Keynes in each of the last five years. (13994)
	The latest year for which figures are available is 2004. The attached table shows the numbers of deaths among residents of Milton Keynes Unitary Authority where the underlying cause of death indicated a condition directly related to alcohol use in the years 2000 to 2004.
	
		Alcohol-related deaths(15) to usual residents of Milton Keynes unitary authority, registered 2000 to 2004
		
			  Number of deaths 
		
		
			 2000 19 
			 2001 21 
			 2002 26 
			 2003 20 
			 2004 22 
		
	
	(15) For the year 2000 the cause of death was defined using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9). The codes used by ONS to define alcohol-related deaths are listed as follows:
	291—Alcoholic psychoses
	303—Alcohol dependence syndrome
	305.0—Non-dependent abuse of alcohol
	425.5—Alcoholic cardiomyopathy
	571—Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis
	E860—Accidental poisoning by alcohol
	For the years 2001–04 the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) was used. To maintain comparability with earlier years the following codes were used:
	F10—Mental and behavioural disorders due to use of alcohol
	142.6—Alcoholic cardiomyopathy
	K70—Alcoholic liver disease
	K73—Chronic hepatitis, not elsewhere classified
	K74—Fobrosis and cirrhosis of liver
	X45—Accidental poisoning by and exposure to alcohol
	Note:
	Deaths were selected using the original underlying cause.
	Source:
	The selection of codes to define alcohol-related deaths is described in:
	Baker A and Rooney C (2003). Recent trends in alcohol-related mortality, and the impact of ICD-10 on the monitoring of these deaths in England and Wales. "Health Statistics Quarterly" 17, pp 5–14.

Correspondence

Paul Burstow: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many letters to his Department from hon. Members in Session (a) 2004–05 and (b) 2005–06 remain unanswered, broken down by those which are (i) one month old, (ii) two months old, (iii) three months old, (iv) four months old and (v) over six months old.

John Healey: Correspondence with the hon. Members is recorded by financial year not parliamentary Session. As at 19 July, the information sought is as follows:
	
		
			  2004–05 2005–06 to date 
		
		
			 1 month old 0 15 
			 2 months old 0 3 
			 3 months old 0 2 
			 4 months old 2 0 
			 6 months old 1 0 
			 Total over 1 month old 3 20

Correspondence

David Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the take-up rate of the (a) child element of child tax credit, (b) family element of child tax credit and (c) child care tax credit in working tax credit, broken down by (i) case load and (ii) expenditure.

Dawn Primarolo: I refer the hon. Gentleman to my answer to the hon. Member for Tatton (Mr. Osborne) on 19 July 2005.

Debt Relief

Ann McKechin: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  to which poor countries the Government's current debt relief programmes apply;
	(2)  what steps he plans to take to ensure (a) that para. 31 of the 2005 G8 Communiqué will be put fully into effect and (b) that international financial institutions no longer impose conditions which run counter to the policy there expressed;
	(3)  what outstanding bilateral debts the UK has from low-income countries; and from when each dates.

Ivan Lewis: The G8 agreement for multilateral debt relief is for all HIPCs who have reached completion point. Currently 18 countries could be eligible for debt worth up to $40 billion (Benin, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guyana, Honduras, Mali, Mauritania, Madagascar, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia). As more countries reach completion point (currently 9 pre-completion point countries, and 11 pre-decision point countries) in the HIPC initiative this will increase in value to $55 billion.
	The UK will also continue with its initiative to pay for the debt servicing of eligible non-HIPCs to the World Bank and African Development Bank. Eligible countries would be those low-income IDA-only borrowers who have sufficiently strong public financial management systems in place to ensure that the savings from debt relief are used for poverty reducing expenditures.
	The G8 proposal is fully consistent with para. 31 of the 2005 G8 Communique with countries eligible for relief ready to demonstrate their commitment to poverty reduction and sound financial management.
	Please see the following table for the countries with outstanding bilateral debt owed to the UK. These are the amounts owed to ECGD under Paris Club bilateral rescheduling agreements.
	
		Sovereign debts owing to ECGD under bilateral debt agreements following Paris Club reschedulings, all countries as at17 July 2005
		
			 Country Debts incurred prior to Outstanding (£ million) 
		
		
			 Algeria October 1993 123.3 
			 Angola January 1987 141.1 
			 Argentina December 1983 33.3 
			 Bosnia and Herzegovina December 1982 1.3 
			 Brazil April 1983 133.4 
			 Cameroon January 1989 52.3 
			 Central African Republic January 1983 0.4 
			 Congo Republic August 1986 151.5 
			 Democratic Republic of Congo July 1983 73.9 
			 Cote D'Ivoire July 1983 17.3 
			 Croatia December 1982 43.1 
			 Cuba September 1982 103.5 
			 Ecuador January 1983 52.4 
			 Egypt November 1986 143.5 
			 Gabon July 1986 139.5 
			 Guinea January 1986 3.9 
			 Indonesia July 1997 743.0 
			 Jamaica October 1983 0.9 
			 Jordan January 1989 344.8 
			 Kenya January 1991 19.8 
			 Liberia January 1983 22.8 
			 Macedonia December 1982 2.4 
			 Malawi January 1982 0.3 
			 Morocco May 1983 13.3 
			 Nigeria October 1985 4,392.7 
			 Pakistan October 1997 6.8 
			 Peru January 1983 101.4 
			 Philippines April 1984 5.2 
			 Russia January 1991 651.8 
			 Senegal January 1983 1.0 
			 Serbia and Montenegro December 1982 252.8 
			 Sierra Leone July 1983 3.3 
			 Somalia October 1983 30.5 
			 Sudan January 1984 580.6 
			 Togo January 1983 20.5 
			 Vietnam January 1990 9.8

Pension Credit

Jessica Morden: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many people in each ward of Newport, East claim pension credit.

James Plaskitt: I have been asked to reply.
	The information is given in the following table.
	
		Pension credit recipients, Newport, East, March 2005
		
			 Ward Pension credit recipients (households) 
		
		
			 Caldicot Castle 115 
			 Dewstow 55 
			 Green Lane 60 
			 Mill 95 
			 Rogiet 45 
			 Severn 140 
			 The Elms 20 
			 West End 75 
			 Always 350 
			 Beechwood 525 
			 Langstone 80 
			 Liswerry 475 
			 Llanwern 140 
			 Ringland 710 
			 St. Julians 330 
			 Victoria 335 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. All wards are based on Census wards, current as at April 2003.
	2. All benefit counts at ward level are rounded to a multiple of five, to protect the confidentiality of individual claimants.
	Source:
	Information Directorate, Department for Work and Pensions, 100 per cent. sample

Red Diesel

James Arbuthnot: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he plans to renew the derogation from EU Directive 2003/96/EC which allows red diesel to be taxed at a lower rate for private recreational marine craft; and if he will make a statement.

John Healey: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Carmichael) on 14 October 2004, Official Report, column 344W.

Tax Credits

George Osborne: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what projections he made prior to the launch of the child tax credit and the working tax credit of the number of awards in 2003–04 that would involve (a) underpayments and (b) overpayments; and what projections he made of the value of these underpayments and overpayments.

Dawn Primarolo: For a projection of the number of awards that may need to be reassessed due to rises in income prior to the introduction of tax credits I refer the hon. Member to page 29 of "The Child and Working Tax Credits. The Modernisation of Britain's Tax and Benefit System. Number Ten". A link of this can be found on HMT website at:
	http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/8D5/BD/new_tax_credits.pdf

Adult Education Colleges

Helen Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what criteria were used for distributing funds to adult education colleges in 2004–05;
	(2)  whether she plans to change the (a) criteria and (b) method for allocating funding for adult education colleges in the next academic year;
	(3)  for what reasons funding for adult education colleges has been allocated for only one year;
	(4)  what factors affected the timing of the announcement of decisions on allocations of funding for adult education colleges;
	(5)  when she expects decisions on allocations of funding for adult education colleges for 2006–07 to be made.

Bill Rammell: The Department allocates funds for post-16 education and training to the Learning and Skills Council (LSC), the body that plans provision and allocates resources to colleges and other providers. Our Grant Letter of 15 November 2004 to the LSC and the White Paper "Skills: Getting on in Business, getting on at work" published in March set out our priorities and the LSC allocate resources to providers to meet our priorities of a place in school, college or on an apprenticeship for all young people, and a focus on adults without a solid foundation of employability skills. Funding is allocated to colleges and other providers on the basis of proven performance in meeting these priorities. Later this year we will publish our annual grant letter outlining our priorities for 2006–07. The notification by the LSC to further education providers of their 2005/06 allocations was in line with the planning timetable set out earlier in the year. We expect the timetable for the planning and budgeting process for 2006/07 to be broadly similar to this year although the LSC expects to begin initial discussions with education providers in September 2005. and other providers. Our Grant Letter of 15 November 2004 to the LSC and the White Paper "Skills: Getting on in Business, getting on at work" published in March set out our priorities and the LSC allocate resources to providers to meet our priorities of a place in school, college or on an apprenticeship for all young people, and a focus on adults without a solid foundation of employability skills. Funding is allocated to colleges and other providers on the basis of proven performance in meeting these priorities. Later this year we will publish our annual grant letter outlining our priorities for 2006–07. The notification by the LSC to further education providers of their 2005/06 allocations was in line with the planning timetable set out earlier in the year. We expect the timetable for the planning and budgeting process for 2006/07 to be broadly similar to this year although the LSC expects to begin initial discussions with education providers in September 2005.

Bullying

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many incidents of bullying of children have been reported in (a) Essex and (b) the Metropolitan Police area of London (i) at primary schools and (ii) in post-primary education in the last three years, broken down by (A) local authority and (B) category of bullying; and how many incidents took place on public transport to or from school in each case.

Jacqui Smith: As data on bullying is not collected centrally we do not have statistics relating to the incidence of bullying at primary or post-primary level in Essex and London. Bullying cases appear to be reported more often now than previously but we have no hard evidence that bullying is increasing or that it is affecting more children. Indeed, as children and young people increasingly feel safe at school to report bullying, and confident that it will be tackled effectively and sensitively, it is likely reporting will rise. However, any level of bullying is too high and we are determined to help schools tackle the problem. Our guidance pack "Bullying: Don't Suffer in Silence", the anti-bullying Charter and the anti-bullying website www.dfes.gov.uk/bullying offer detailed advice on preventing and addressing bullying. We also offer specific advice to schools on tackling homophobic bullying and are developing advice on racist bullying.
	We have raised awareness of the importance of children who are being bullied telling an adult about what is happening, through our public information film "Tell Someone" and our leaflets and postcards for children and their parents. Our recent "Beat Bullying" blue wristband campaign was launched in partnership with Radio One, during the first national anti-bullying week in November 2004. By the end of December, one million children and young people had answered our call to "Make a Stand, Wear a Band" and make a visible commitment that they are not prepared to tolerate bullying and will stand by their friends.

Children's Academic Achievement

Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what research she has evaluated on whether there is a relationship between the number of hours spent watching television and children's academic achievement.

Beverley Hughes: The Department has not commissioned any research on the relationship between the number of hours spent watching television and children's academic achievement However, current international research evidence points to the following:
	Watching good quality educational programming in the early years can benefit children's language development, in the right conditions.
	Conversely, extensive viewing of age-inappropriate or entertainment programming can hinder language development.
	In addition, television viewing before age three has been shown to have a modest adverse effect on cognitive outcomes at age six and seven.
	Increased television viewing by children has a long-lasting association with a higher chance of having no formal qualifications by the age of 26.
	Other learning activities such as reading may be displaced by television viewing.
	Having a television in the bedroom is negatively associated with test scores for children aged 8.
	The American academy of paediatrics recommends that children watch a maximum of two hours of quality programming per day. The National Literacy Trust's "Talk To Your Baby" campaign recommends no more than half-an-hour for under twos, and one hour for three to five-year-olds.

Classroom Behaviour

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what assistance her Department (a) is giving and (b) plans to give during the next 12 months to schools in Southend to promote good behaviour in the classroom.

Jacqui Smith: Our Secondary Strategy will continue to give all secondary schools in Southend access to high-quality behaviour management training materials and support from a DFES-funded behaviour management consultant. Our Primary Strategy will continue to give all primary schools in Southend access to high-quality training and curriculum materials to improve children's social, emotional and behavioural skills. In addition:
	our Excellence in Cities programme will continue to provide Southend with extra funding (£1.6 million for the 2005–06 school year), about half of which can be used to fund Learning Mentors and Learning Support Units in schools in the Southend Excellence Cluster; and
	our Behaviour Improvement Programme is now providing Southend with further additional funding (£780,000 for the 2005–06 school year) to support selected schools facing the greatest behaviour challenges.

Drinking Water

Joan Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what assessment her Department has made of the health benefits to pupils and staff of providing fresh drinking water throughout the school day;
	(2)  what steps her Department takes (a) to inform local education authorities, (b) governors and (c) schools of their responsibility for the provision of fresh drinking water to children and staff throughout the school day;
	(3)  what assessment she has made of the increased requirement for access to fresh drinking water for pupils arising from the extension of the school day from eight to six o'clock.

Jacqui Smith: We are aware of the importance of school children drinking water during their working day and the benefits that it brings. For the last three years both the Department of Health and Department for Education and Skills have been working on a food in schools programme that aims to help schools implement a whole school approach to food education and healthy eating. The interactive food in schools toolkit which can be viewed at www.foodinschools.org, provides a wide range of guidance, resources and interactive tools to inspire and support schools in taking a whole school approach to healthy eating and drinking, including water provision.
	The "water provision" guidance supports schools in reviewing and improving current provision and in promoting water consumption. The guidance has been informed by the food in schools water provision project, which was piloted in 40 schools in the North East and East Midland region.
	Cross Government working between the DfES, Department of Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), Department of Health (DoH) and the Food Standards Agency (FSA), on ways to increase awareness of the importance of food and drink within the school environment resulted in the publication on 6 September 2004 of the "Healthy Living Blueprint for Schools".
	The blueprint, issued to all schools, brings together all Government advice and examples of best practice about healthy eating and drinking in schools. It provides schools with advice on what they can do to improve children's approach to food and drink and exercise, and shows how developing whole school approaches can help bring about significant improvements to the health of children.
	"Healthy School Lunches Guidance", published by the DfES, contains the Secretary of State's expectation that drinking water should be available to all pupils every day, free of charge. This view is mirrored in the "Healthy Living Blueprint for Schools", which states that,
	"all pupils should have access to drinking water at all times at a number of points around the school, preferably not from taps in the toilets. Pupils should be permitted to carry water with them and consumption encouraged both in class and during break and lunch time".
	However, it is the responsibility of head teachers and school's governing bodies to decide when water should be made available. We consider that they are best placed to make these decisions in their role of having responsibility of the day-to-day running of the school and with their knowledge of the individual circumstances of their pupils.

Drinking Water

Joan Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what steps her Department plans to take to ensure that local education authorities and individual schools raise the standard of their drinking water facilities.

Jacqui Smith: We have already issued design guidance for new school buildings in the May 2003 revision of Building Bulletin 87 "Guidelines for Environmental Design in Schools", which can be downloaded from www.teachernet.gov.uk/energy. We are also producing a joint publication on Sustainable Water Management in Schools with the Environment Agency and DEFRA to be published in October 2005. Finally we will be revising the School Premises Regulations to give more specific guidance on drinking water.

Education Funding

Michael Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the total recurrent funding per pupil was for each local education authority for years 1998–99 to 2005–06 in 2005–06 real terms.

Jacqui Smith: Total funding includes funding via education formula spending (EPS)/standard spending assessment and revenue grants allocated at an LEA level. It excludes the pensions transfer to EFS and the Learning and Skills Council, and is in real terms.
	These figures use the latest GDP deflators provided by the Office for National Statistics as at 30 June 2005, which are based on 2004–05 prices. 
	
		Real terms total revenue funding per pupil aged 3–19, (£), by LEA(16)
		
			 LEA name 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 
		
		
			 Barking and Dagenham 3,370 3,480 3,740 3,960 4,120 
			 Barnet 3,260 3,380 3,560 3,810 3,960 
			 Barnsley 2,870 3,010 3,240 3,420 3,520 
			 Bath and North East Somerset 2,750 2,890 3,100 3,200 3,300 
			 Bedfordshire 2,900 3,020 3,290 3,460 3,570 
			 Bexley 3,080 3,160 3,350 3,520 3,650 
			 Birmingham 3,150 3,330 3,650 3,860 3,960 
			 Blackburn with Darwen 3,060 3,290 3,550 3,730 3,820 
			 Blackpool 2,930 3,040 3,290 3,430 3,540 
			 Bolton 2,830 2,990 3,240 3,360 3,480 
			 Bournemouth 2,970 3,060 3,280 3,370 3,430 
			 Bracknell Forest 3,010 3,090 3,290 3,450 3,560 
			 Bradford 3,010 3,210 3,530 3,750 3,840 
			 Brent 3,780 3,920 4,130 4,390 4,570 
			 Brighton and Hove 3,150 3,270 3,540 3,690 3,780 
			 Bristol, City of 2,910 3,050 3,330 3,490 3,620 
			 Bromley 3,090 3,200 3,400 3,570 3,690 
			 Buckinghamshire 2,960 3,080 3,300 3,460 3,570 
			 Bury 2,730 2,870 3,090 3,240 3,330 
			 Calderdale 2,850 3,020 3,250 3,380 3,500 
			 Cambridgeshire 2,780 2,930 3,130 3,240 3,320 
			 Camden 4,380 4,610 4,970 5,210 5,400 
			 Cheshire 2,740 2,860 3,070 3,200 3,280 
			 Cornwall 2,920 3,050 3,270 3,410 3,510 
			 Coventry 3,020 3,160 3,410 3,540 3,650 
			 Croydon 3,310 3,450 3,660 3,850 3,970 
			 Cumbria 2,810 2,950 3,200 3,360 3,460 
			 Darlington 2,800 2,960 3,220 3,360 3,420 
			 Derby 2,940 3,110 3,340 3,460 3,580 
			 Derbyshire 2,730 2,860 3,080 3,200 3,300 
			 Devon 2,920 3,000 3,210 3,330 3,410 
			 Doncaster 2,920 3,060 3,290 3,440 3,550 
			 Dorset 2,820 2,930 3,150 3,270 3,370 
			 Dudley 2,690 2,820 3,040 3,170 3,260 
			 Durham 2,860 3,000 3,270 3,470 3,530 
			 Ealing 3,500 3,650 3,920 4,170 4,280 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 2,760 2,890 3,140 3,270 3,340 
			 East Sussex 3,010 3,130 3,390 3,540 3,630 
			 Enfield 3,370 3,510 3,710 3,960 4,140 
			 Essex 3,000 3,100 3,330 3,490 3,570 
			 Gateshead 2,910 3,050 3,340 3,550 3,660 
			 Gloucestershire 2,800 2,940 3,160 3,280 3,370 
			 Greenwich 3,940 4,180 4,580 4,800 5,000 
			 Hackney 4,560 4,860 5,200 5,410 5,600 
			 Halton 2,980 3,120 3,420 3,660 3,770 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 4,360 4,570 4,930 5,150 5,440 
			 Hampshire 2,830 2,920 3,140 3,310 3,390 
			 Haringey 3,870 4,110 4,410 4,670 4,800 
			 Harrow 3,190 3,310 3,530 3,740 3,840 
			 Hartlepool 2,900 3,030 3,300 3,490 3,590 
			 Havering 3,060 3,140 3,330 3,530 3,630 
			 Herefordshire 2,910 3,040 3,260 3,380 3,470 
			 Hertfordshire 3,000 3,090 3,320 3,470 3,560 
			 Hillingdon 3,230 3,370 3,560 3,690 3,810 
			 Hounslow 3,420 3,580 3,810 4,030 4,220 
			 Isle of Wight 3,120 3,230 3,500 3,690 3,780 
			 Islington 4,290 4,530 5,000 5,300 5,440 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 4,360 4,670 5,030 5,280 5,610 
			 Kent 3,000 3,110 3,340 3,500 3,610 
			 Kingston upon Hull, City of 3,010 3,160 3,470 3,650 3,750 
			 Kingston upon Thames 3,050 3,170 3,390 3,600 3,710 
			 Kirklees 2,880 3,050 3,280 3,440 3,530 
			 Knowsley 3,290 3,460 3,830 4,080 4,190 
			 Lambeth 4,650 4,870 5,210 5,390 5,590 
			 Lancashire 2,850 2,990 3,230 3,380 3,460 
			 Leeds 2,850 2,990 3,280 3,470 3,590 
			 Leicester 3,130 3,310 3,560 3,720 3,850 
			 Leicestershire 2,730 2,850 3,050 3,170 3,250 
			 Lewisham 4,190 4,390 4,690 4,930 5,110 
			 Lincolnshire 2,860 2,990 3,210 3,360 3,460 
			 Liverpool 3,260 3,430 3,830 4,040 4,160 
			 Luton 3,180 3,340 3,570 3,750 3,870 
			 Manchester 3,360 3,590 4,010 4,220 4,320 
			 Medway 2,960 3,070 3,290 3,450 3,570 
			 Merton 3,230 3,370 3,620 3,870 3,890 
			 Middlesbrough 3,080 3,250 3,540 3,770 3,890 
			 Milton Keynes 3,060 3,180 3,390 3,560 3,690 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 3,130 3,260 3,570 3,780 3,890 
			 Newham 3,920 4,070 4,330 4,610 4,730 
			 Norfolk 2,900 3,020 3,260 3,410 3,490 
			 North East Lincolnshire 2,900 3,050 3,320 3,490 3,580 
			 North Lincolnshire 2,890 3,030 3,280 3,390 3,450 
			 North Somerset 2,800 2,940 3,150 3,240 3,320 
			 North Tyneside 2,800 2,920 3,210 3,380 3,520 
			 North Yorkshire 2,810 2,950 3,180 3,310 3,410 
			 Northamptonshire 2,790 2,920 3,130 3,260 3,350 
			 Northumberland 2,830 2,950 3,200 3,390 3,500 
			 Nottingham 3,200 3,380 3,670 3,870 4,020 
			 Nottinghamshire 2,780 2,900 3,140 3,250 3,340 
			 Oldham 2,910 3,080 3,320 3,480 3,650 
			 Oxfordshire 2,960 3,070 3,310 3,460 3,560 
			 Peterborough 3,010 3,180 3,390 3,520 3,660 
			 Plymouth 2,970 3,060 3,280 3,390 3,500 
			 Poole 2,790 2,880 3,050 3,180 3,300 
			 Portsmouth 3,070 3,180 3,390 3,590 3,680 
			 Reading 3,090 3,210 3,490 3,650 3,820 
			 Redbridge 3,320 3,410 3,600 3,770 3,900 
			 Redcar and Cleveland 2,890 3,020 3,310 3,540 3,620 
			 Richmond upon Thames 3,010 3,120 3,340 3,520 3,580 
			 Rochdale 2,940 3,100 3,380 3,550 3,710 
			 Rotherham 2,860 3,010 3,310 3,500 3,580 
			 Rutland 2,720 2,900 3,090 3,260 3,290 
			 Salford 2,960 3,130 3,490 3,730 3,780 
			 Sandwell 2,980 3,130 3,360 3,550 3,680 
			 Sefton 2,860 2,980 3,250 3,420 3,550 
			 Sheffield 2,930 3,100 3,420 3,590 3,660 
			 Shropshire 2,820 2,940 3,160 3,310 3,390 
			 Slough 3,560 3,700 3,930 4,140 4,300 
			 Solihull 2,700 2,800 3,000 3,130 3,210 
			 Somerset 2,810 2,940 3,170 3,300 3,370 
			 South Gloucestershire 2,680 2,810 2,990 3,090 3,200 
			 South Tyneside 2,950 3,110 3,410 3,640 3,720 
			 Southampton 3,140 3,240 3,470 3,660 3,750 
			 Southend-on-Sea 3,080 3,190 3,420 3,600 3,700 
			 Southwark 4,240 4,460 4,780 5,020 5,190 
			 St. Helens 2,850 2,960 3,230 3,460 3,570 
			 Staffordshire 2,690 2,810 3,020 3,150 3,210 
			 Stockport 2,680 2,810 3,040 3,180 3,230 
			 Stockton-on-Tees 2,830 2,990 3,300 3,520 3,620 
			 Stoke-on-Trent 2,840 2,970 3,280 3,500 3,610 
			 Suffolk 2,820 2,930 3,150 3,280 3,380 
			 Sunderland 2,900 3,020 3,310 3,510 3,610 
			 Surrey 2,970 3,070 3,270 3,430 3,510 
			 Sutton 3,170 3,270 3,450 3,630 3,760 
			 Swindon 2,790 2,890 3,100 3,210 3,270 
			 Tameside 2,780 2,920 3,160 3,350 3,450 
			 Telford and Wrekin 2,910 3,030 3,290 3,450 3,490 
			 Thurrock 3,150 3,260 3,480 3,660 3,770 
			 Torbay 2,970 3,060 3,280 3,380 3,460 
			 Tower Hamlets 4,520 4,890 5,240 5,540 5,730 
			 Trafford 2,770 2,930 3,150 3,310 3,360 
			 Wakefield 2,750 2,890 3,150 3,290 3,390 
			 Walsall 2,850 3,010 3,250 3,390 3,500 
			 Waltham Forest 3,630 3,790 4,060 4,320 4,450 
			 Wandsworth 3,960 4,150 4,430 4,630 4,710 
			 Warrington 2,710 2,810 3,010 3,150 3,230 
			 Warwickshire 2,740 2.880 3,090 3,210 3,320 
			 West Berkshire 2,880 2,980 3,230 3,400 3,500 
			 West Sussex 2,930 3,020 3,220 3,380 3,470 
			 Westminster 4,240 4,510 4,820 5,000 5,210 
			 Wigan 2,760 2,890 3,120 3,260 3,330 
			 Wiltshire 2,820 2,940 3,150 3,260 3,340 
			 Windsor and Maidenhead 3,040 3,130 3,380 3,560 3,670 
			 Wirral 2,980 3,090 3,370 3,570 3,700 
			 Wokingham 2,760 2,840 3,060 3,220 3.340 
			 Wolverhampton 3,000 3,180 3,440 3,610 3,800 
			 Worcestershire 2,770 2,850 3,070 3,210 3,290 
			 York 2,760 2,890 3,130 3,240 3,310 
		
	
	
		
			 LEA name 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 Percentage increase 1998–99 to 2005–06 Rank by percentage increase 
		
		
			 Barking and Dagenham 4,300 4,490 4,610 36.8 83 
			 Barnet 4,130 4,300 4,550 39.6 53 
			 Barnsley 3,730 3,840 4,010 39.7 51 
			 Bath and North East Somerset 3,410 3,570 3,750 36.4 91 
			 Bedfordshire 3,630 3,790 3,950 36.2 92 
			 Bexley 3,780 3,940 4,060 31.8 137 
			 Birmingham 4,140 4,290 4,530 43.8 9 
			 Blackburn with Darwen 4,060 4,210 4,400 43.8 10 
			 Blackpool 3,730 3,880 4,040 37.9 70 
			 Bolton 3,600 3,770 4,030 42.4 26 
			 Bournemouth 3,490 3,620 3,760 26.6 148 
			 Bracknell Forest 3,690 3,840 4,030 33.9 113 
			 Bradford 3,970 4,120 4,310 43.2 14 
			 Brent 4,780 5,000 5,190 37.3 75 
			 Brighton and Hove 3,880 4,020 4,130 31.1 142 
			 Bristol, City of 3,770 3,980 4,180 43.6 11 
			 Bromley 3,820 3,990 4,130 33.7 116 
			 Buckinghamshire 3,680 3,850 4,000 35.1 101 
			 Bury 3,480 3,670 3,840 40.7 47 
			 Calderdale 3,670 3,840 4,030 41.4 37 
			 Cambridgeshire 3,490 3,660 3,810 37.1 76 
			 Camden 5,610 5,890 6,000 37.0 79 
			 Cheshire 3,420 3,570 3,740 36.5 89 
			 Cornwall 3,570 3,720 3,870 32.5 129 
			 Coventry 3,800 3,980 4,180 38.4 63 
			 Croydon 4,060 4,270 4,400 32.9 126 
			 Cumbria 3,630 3,780 3,950 40.6 48 
			 Darlington 3,570 3,780 3,950 41.1 42 
			 Derby 3,720 3,880 4,020 36.7 84 
			 Derbyshire 3,430 3,580 3,750 37.4 74 
			 Devon 3,530 3,670 3,820 30.8 144 
			 Doncaster 3,810 3,950 4,130 41.4 35 
			 Dorset 3,470 3,620 3,750 33.0 125 
			 Dudley 3,390 3,560 3,810 41.6 32 
			 Durham 3,670 3,820 4,050 41.6 33 
			 Ealing 4,510 4,740 5,000 42.9 19 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 3,450 3,600 3,750 35.9 95 
			 East Sussex 3,700 3,880 4,020 33.6 117 
			 Enfield 4,250 4,450 4,570 35.6 98 
			 Essex 3,680 3,850 3,970 32.3 131 
			 Gateshead 3,860 3,990 4,150 42.6 23 
			 Gloucestershire 3,480 3,610 3,770 34.6 106 
			 Greenwich 5,140 5,340 5,550 40.9 45 
			 Hackney 5,850 6,060 6,310 38.4 64 
			 Halton 3,990 4,170 4,360 46.3 3 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 5,570 5,820 5,910 35.6 99 
			 Hampshire 3,470 3,620 3,730 31.8 138 
			 Haringey 5,000 5,230 5,340 38.0 67 
			 Harrow 4,050 4,230 4,440 39.2 57 
			 Hartlepool 3,840 4,010 4,220 45.5 5 
			 Havering 3,740 3,910 4,050 32.4 130 
			 Herefordshire 3,640 3,790 3,960 36.1 93 
			 Hertfordshire 3,640 3,810 3,910 30.3 145 
			 Hillingdon 3,990 4,200 4,440 37.5 72 
			 Hounslow 4,460 4,630 4,840 41.5 34 
			 Isle of Wight 3,810 3,970 4,110 31.7 139 
			 Islington 5,590 5,870 6,110 42.4 24 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 5,730 6,010 6,100 39.9 50 
			 Kent 3,710 3,900 3,990 33.0 124 
			 Kingston upon Hull, City of 3.920 4,070 4,250 41.2 41 
			 Kingston upon Thames 3,850 4,050 4,250 39.3 55 
			 Kirklees 3,700 3,880 4,060 41.0 43 
			 Knowsley 4,280 4,420 4,540 38.0 66 
			 Lambeth 5,650 5,930 6,120 31.6 140 
			 Lancashire 3,550 3,720 3,900 36.8 82 
			 Leeds 3,730 3,870 4,010 40.7 46 
			 Leicester 4,040 4,190 4,370 39.6 52 
			 Leicestershire 3,330 3,470 3,590 31.5 141 
			 Lewisham 5,300 5,510 5,740 37.0 78 
			 Lincolnshire 3,610 3,760 3,910 36.7 85 
			 Liverpool 4,250 4,420 4,540 39.3 56 
			 Luton 4,040 4,200 4,390 38.1 65 
			 Manchester 4,450 4,590 4,750 41.4 38 
			 Medway 3,630 3,790 3,910 32.1 134 
			 Merton 4,080 4,290 4,490 39.0 59 
			 Middlesbrough 4,080 4,330 4,580 48.7 1 
			 Milton Keynes 3,800 3,990 4,160 35.9 94 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 4,030 4,180 4,340 38.7 61 
			 Newham 4,850 5,040 5,230 33.4 119 
			 Norfolk 3,590 3,760 3,900 34.5 108 
			 North East Lincolnshire 3,670 3,830 4,030 39.0 60 
			 North Lincolnshire 3,610 3,750 3,950 36.7 86 
			 North Somerset 3,470 3,600 3,780 35.0 103 
			 North Tyneside 3,690 3,820 3,960 41.4 36 
			 North Yorkshire 3,550 3,690 3,840 36.7 87 
			 Northamptonshire 3,520 3,660 3,820 36.9 81 
			 Northumberland 3,640 3,800 4,000 41.3 39 
			 Nottingham 4,190 4,370 4,620 44.4 8 
			 Nottinghamshire 3,440 3,580 3,740 34.5 107 
			 Oldham 3,830 4,010 4,220 45.0 6 
			 Oxfordshire 3,650 3,810 3,940 33.1 123 
			 Peterborough 3,850 4,070 4,220 40.2 49 
			 Plymouth 3,600 3,750 3,930 32.3 132 
			 Poole 3,400 3,530 3,680 31.9 136 
			 Portsmouth 3,760 3,960 4,070 32.6 128 
			 Reading 3,970 4,200 4,410 42.7 21 
			 Redbridge 3,960 4,150 4,300 29.5 147 
			 Redcar and Cleveland 3,810 3,970 4,130 42.9 18 
			 Richmond upon Thames 3,680 3,870 4,030 33.9 113 
			 Rochdale 3,880 4,080 4,300 46.3 4 
			 Rotherham 3,770 3,880 4,030 40.9 44 
			 Rutland 3,490 3,620 3,860 41.9 30 
			 Salford 3,930 4,090 4,280 44.6 7 
			 Sandwell 3,870 4,040 4,260 43.0 17 
			 Sefton 3,720 3,860 4,040 41.3 40 
			 Sheffield 3,790 3,920 4,060 38.6 62 
			 Shropshire 3,550 3,700 3,850 36.5 88 
			 Slough 4,420 4,620 4,750 33.4 118 
			 Solihull 3,410 3,550 3,700 37.0 77 
			 Somerset 3,490 3,640 3,770 34.2 111 
			 South Gloucestershire 3,340 3,480 3,640 35.8 97 
			 South Tyneside 3,930 4,070 4,230 43.4 12 
			 Southampton 3,860 4,020 4,200 33.8 115 
			 Southend-on-Sea 3,780 3,960 4,090 32.8 127 
			 Southwark 5,350 5,600 5,900 39.2 58 
			 St. Helens 3,780 3,930 4,070 42.8 20 
			 Staffordshire 3,370 3,510 3,670 36.4 90 
			 Stockport 3,370 3,510 3,670 36.9 80 
			 Stockton-on-Tees 3,810 3,930 4,050 43.1 16 
			 Stoke-on-Trent 3,840 4,010 4,200 47.9 2 
			 Suffolk 3,460 3,620 3,760 33.3 120 
			 Sunderland 3,810 3,950 4,130 42.4 25 
			 Surrey 3,600 3,750 3,930 32.3 132 
			 Sutton 3,900 4,100 4,220 33.1 122 
			 Swindon 3,450 3,590 3,770 35.1 102 
			 Tameside 3,590 3,790 3,940 41.7 31 
			 Telford and Wrekin 3,620 3,760 3,920 34.7 105 
			 Thurrock 3,890 4,090 4,160 32.1 135 
			 Torbay 3,560 3,690 3,850 29.6 146 
			 Tower Hamlets 5,940 6,160 6,450 42.7 22 
			 Trafford 3,510 3,630 3,810 37.5 71 
			 Wakefield 3,520 3,660 3,910 42.2 29 
			 Walsall 3,640 3,820 4,080 43.2 15 
			 Waltham Forest 4,560 4,800 4,890 34.7 104 
			 Wandsworth 5,020 5,210 5,440 37.4 73 
			 Warrington 3,340 3,460 3,640 34.3 110 
			 Warwickshire 3,500 3,650 3,780 38.0 68 
			 West Berkshire 3,690 3,870 4,100 42.4 28 
			 West Sussex 3,570 3,720 3,840 31.1 143 
			 Westminster 5,450 5,660 5,760 35.8 96 
			 Wigan 3,510 3,670 3,850 39.5 54 
			 Wiltshire 3,510 3,650 3,790 34.4 109 
			 Windsor and Maidenhead 3,780 3,940 4,120 35.5 100 
			 Wirral 3,830 3,970 4,110 37.9 69 
			 Wokingham 3,530 3,700 3,930 42.4 27 
			 Wolverhampton 3,940 4,100 4,300 43.3 13 
			 Worcestershire 3,390 3,530 3,690 33.2 121 
			 York 3,400 3,530 3,700 34.1 112 
		
	
	(16) Pensions not included 2003–04 to 2005–06.
	Notes:
	1. Price Base: Real terms.
	2. Figures reflect relevant sub-blocks of the education formula spending settlement and exclude the pensions transfer to EFS.
	3. Total funding also includes all revenue grants in DfES departmental expenditure limits relevant to pupils aged 3–19, and exclude EMAs and grants not allocated at LEA level. For those LEAs in receipt of advance of grant under the transitional support arrangements for 2004–05, advance grant funding is included in the year of payment (2004–05). There will be a consequential reduction in DfES grant for these LEAs in future years (either 2006–07 and 2007–08 or 2006–07 to 2008–09, depending on the terms on which the advance was given to the LEA).
	4. The pupil numbers used to convert m figures to per pupil are those underlying the SSA/EFS settlement calculations plus PLASC 3-year-old maintained pupils and estimated 3 to 4-year-olds funded through state support in maintained and other educational institutions where these are not included in the SSA pupil numbers.
	5. Rounding: Per pupil figures are rounded to the nearest £10. Total allocation figures are rounded to the nearest £10 million.
	6. Status: 2003–04 to 2005–06 figures are provisional as some grants have not yet been finalised/audited.

Emergency Contraception

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what measures are in place to ensure that girls aged under 16 years are properly supervised when taking emergency contraception
	(2)  if she will list the schools in Southend that allow emergency contraception to be distributed to children at that school without parental knowledge or consent;
	(3)  how many times school nurses in Southend have issued emergency contraception in each of the last five years for which figures are available;
	(4)  how many girls in Southend have been given emergency contraception by school nurses in each of the last five years for which figures are available, broken down by the age of the girl;
	(5)  what guidance she has given to schools regarding the potential liability of (a) school governors, (b) teachers, (c) head teachers and (d) other school staff in the event of possible adverse consequences following emergency contraception being provided to girls under the age of 16 years by school staff or on school premises without the consent of parents;
	(6)  what guidance she has given schools regarding the possible adverse consequences of emergency contraception being provided to girls under the age of 16 years by school staff or on school premises.

Beverley Hughes: Provision of emergency contraception is always by a health professional under medical supervision. This includes community and school nurses and community pharmacists, working to Patient Group Directions (a written instruction for the supply or administration of medicines to groups of patients without an individualised doctor's prescription). Emergency contraception cannot be provided by non-health professionals.
	Health professionals can provide contraception to young people aged under 16 provided they are satisfied that the young person is competent to understand fully the implications of any treatment and to make a choice of the treatment involved. Health professionals work within an established legal framework which involves assessing the young person's competence to understand the choices they are making and encouraging them to talk to their parents.
	The decision on whether to provide school-based health advice services and the scope of the service is for each individual governing body, in consultation with parents, teachers and the wider school community. There is no requirement on schools to provide data for central collection.

Employer Training

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what proportion of the employer training pilots were delivered successfully by the (a) private and (b) public sectors;
	(2)  whether contracts for the national employer training programme will be open to providers from the (a) private and (b) public sectors; and whether part of the budget will be ring-fenced for public sector providers;
	(3)  if she will make a statement on the relative emphasis of the employer training pilots between (a) increasing the number of employees with NVQ qualifications and (b) ensuring that employees meet a skills demand.

Phil Hope: Figures provided by the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) show that as of July 2005, 31 per cent. of learners participating in employer training pilots have their learning delivered by colleges of further education and 69 per cent. delivered by independent providers.
	As we announced in our White Paper, "Skills: Getting on in business, getting on at work", the national employer training programme (NETP) will offer employers informed choice between quality-assured training providers. This is an essential part of putting the employer in a position where, in effect, they are able to make the purchasing decision about what training they get. Brokers, acting on behalf of the employer, will be able to source training from any LSC-approved provider, whether colleges or other providers.
	We are continuing to work closely with the LSC on the details of NETP funding and how it will be allocated to providers in the context of agenda for change. We cannot give precise details about allocations to providers until this work is complete.
	The emphasis of employer training pilots (ETPs) has been to encourage employers to invest in skills and qualifications, particularly for low skilled trainees. They are testing out a package of public financial support measures to improve access to training and enable employees to attain Skills for Life and/or their first full NVQ level 2 qualification.
	At the end of June 2005, the pilots had signed up 23,101 employers and 184,198 employees, and 68,902 learners had successfully completed their learning.
	As with the pilots, the core of the national employer training programme will be free, high quality training for employees who lack basic skills in literacy, language and numeracy or a first full Level 2 qualification. Beyond that core of free training up to Level 2, employers will be able to access more comprehensive training packages to meet their wider needs, including at Level 3 and higher, and non-qualification based training. As part of the partnership between Government and the employer in raising investment in skills, we will look to employers to pay a fair contribution towards the cost of this wider training.

Mathematics

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills pursuant to the answer of 4 July 2005, Official Report, column 175W, on approved qualifications, how many pupils were entered for each Level 3 qualification classified within the subject sector category Mathematics and Statistics in 2003–04.

Jacqui Smith: The number of pupils entered for Mathematics and Statistics GCE A and AS Levels in 2003/04 were as follows.
	
		
			  Edexcel OCR AQA WJEC 
		
		
			 GCE A Level entries for 16 to 18-year-old students 
			 Mathematics 19,672 18.200 7,383 69 
			 Mathematics (Pure) 58 7 64 0 
			 Mathematics (Statistics) 44 0 483 0 
			 Mathematics (Further) 2,300 2,113 694 4 
			 Additional Mathematics 0 37 0 0 
			 Total 22,074 20,357 8,624 73 
			  
			 GCE AS Level entries for 16 to 18-year-old students 
			 Mathematics 4,961 3,944 9,041 23 
			 Mathematics (Mechanics) 238 52 0 0 
			 Mathematics (Pure) 373 54 80 0 
			 Mathematics (Discrete) 22 7 0 0 
			 Mathematics (Applied) 15,569 14,378 278 61 
			 Mathematics (Statistics) 639 396 864 0 
			 Mathematics (Further) 905 1,017 632 1 
			 Additional Mathematics 0 57 0 0 
			 Total 22,707 19,905 10,895 85

Correspondence

Paul Burstow: To ask the Leader of the House how many letters to his Office from hon. Members in session (a) 2004–05 and (b) 2005–06 remain unanswered, broken down by those which are (i) one month old, (ii) two months old, (iii) three months old, (iv) four months old and (v) over six months old.

Geoff Hoon: No letters to my Office from hon. Members for the session 2004–05 remain unanswered, and 94 per cent. of letters requiring a reply were answered within our target of 15 working days.
	For the current session 10 letters remain unanswered which are under one month old. We expect to answer these within our 15 working day target.

Audio Recordings

James McGovern: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what plans she has to increase the duration of copyright on audio recordings to 100 years; and if she will make a statement.

Alan Johnson: holding answer 19 July 2005
	I have been asked to reply.
	I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford (Mr. Whittingdale) on 27 June 2005, Official Report, column 1228W.

Bike Trails

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what steps her Department is taking to encourage tourists to visit mountain bike trail sites.

James Purnell: My Department supports the English and British tourism sector through VisitBritain. VisitBritain regularly highlights Britain's off-road cycling facilities to all tourists through its promotional materials and campaigns. Mountain biking features strongly in VisitBritain's new "Outdoor England" campaign, which encourages domestic tourists to take advantage of Britain's countryside offer. Further information can be found on the website www.enjoyengland/outdoor.

Licenced Premises

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will estimate the number of (a) licensed premises and (b) licensed premises serving food in each local authority area.

James Purnell: There are no available figures for the numbers of licensed premises which serve food by local authority area. No distinction is made under the present licensing framework between public houses, for example, which serve food, and those which do not. This is also the case for the new regime introduced by the Licensing Act 2003.
	There were 75,972 public houses across England in June 2004. The Department of Health estimated that between 10 per cent. and 30 per cent. of them do not serve food, in the November 2004 White Paper "Choosing Health". My Department believes that this estimate remains a reasonable one, but that in many areas of England the proportion will be at the lower end of the range.

London Olympics

Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will highlight the city of St. Albans in promotional literature for visitors to the 2012 Olympic games.

Tessa Jowell: There is an active East of England Olympic Working Group, led by East of England Development Agency (EEDA) and Sport England East, which will continue its work in partnership with the London Organising Committee.
	This group has already contributed to the London 2012 nations and regions website, which specifically mention St. Albans.
	While it is a little too early to say what form tourism promotion will take in 2012, I am committed to the continued engagement of Government and the Organising committee for the games with the nations and regions to ensure that the social and economic benefits of the games are maximised and shared right across the UK.

London Olympics

Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what benefits she expects to accrue to East Yorkshire as a result of the Olympic games being held in London.

Tessa Jowell: holding answer 20 July 2005
	The games will also deliver significant economic benefits. The games will attract investment, offer UK companies the opportunity to compete for billions of pounds worth of contracts, offer each nation and region the opportunity to bid for preparation camps and provide a welcome boost to the UK tourism industry.
	As we set out to the International Olympic Committee, we expect the 2012 Olympic games and Paralympics games to be an inspiration to our children and young people, to promote sporting activity and culture throughout the UK.
	Yorkshire Forward, the Yorkshire and Humber Regional Development Agency leads the East of England Olympic Working Group, which will continue to work with the London Organising Committee to identify games benefits, develop and deliver a strategy to achieve them. In February this year, this group launched a publication entitled "Yorkshire, proud to be part of the winning team" that estimated the economic benefits of the games to Yorkshire to be in the region of £600 million.

National Lottery

Charles Walker: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what meetings she has held with the National Lottery Commission to discuss the responses to the consultation document "A Lottery for the future".

Richard Caborn: The National Lottery Commission has sole responsibility for running the competition for the next lottery licence. I recently met the Commission to discuss a number of subjects in the course of which the Commission briefed me about the responses to its discussion document.

National Lottery

Charles Walker: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many responses the National Lottery Commission received to its consultation document "A Lottery for the future"; and when those responses will be published.

Richard Caborn: The National Lottery Commission has already received 20 responses to its discussion document "A Lottery for the future", in addition to undertaking a significant amount of wider discussion. The National Lottery Commission will publish a summary of the responses in due course.

National Lottery

Charles Walker: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many times the National Lottery Commission (NLC) has (a) investigated section 6 breaches by Camelot and (b) fined Camelot for section 6 breaches of its licence (i) since the NLC began (ii) under Oflot.

Richard Caborn: The information requested is as follows.
	
		Licence breaches recorded under OFLOT
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 1994–95 0 
			 1995–96 2 
			 1996–97 2 
			 1997–98 3 
			 1998–99 2 
		
	
	
		Licence breaches recorded under the NLC
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 1999–2000 1 
			 2001–02 4 
			 2002–03 1 
			 2003–04 4 
			 2004–05 0 
		
	
	The NLC has fined Camelot once for a section 6 licence breach during 2001–02.

Council Tax

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what were the (a) average (i) B and (ii) D council tax in England and (b) average council tax per dwelling in England were, (A) before capping and (B) after the introduction of in-year capping, in (1) 2004–05 and (2) 2005–06.

Phil Woolas: The information requested for England is shown in the table.
	
		£
		
			  Average band B council tax Average band D council tax Average council tax per dwelling 
		
		
			 2004–05 907 1,167 967 
			 2005–06 944 1,214 1,009 
		
	
	In-year capping makes no difference to the figures at a national level for 2004–05 when rounded to the nearest pound. Assuming that capped authorities reduce their budgets in 2005–06 to the maximum permitted budget requirement, the same would be true for this year.
	Capping remains an effective means of bringing down council tax increases as authorities would otherwise go on to set higher increases. In 2003–04, the last year in which capping powers were not exercised, the average council tax increase in England was 12.9 per cent. This reduced to 5.9 per cent. in 2004–05 and fell again to 4.1 per cent. in 2005–06—in both these years, the Government made clear that they were prepared to use their powers to cap excessive council tax increases.

Fire Service

Damian Green: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what guidance he has issued to the Fire Service on the safety implications of the use of decorative hops in public houses, in relation to fire inspections required under the Licensing Act 2003.

Jim Fitzpatrick: None. However, extant guidance is provided in the "Guide to Fire Precautions in existing places of entertainment and like premises" (ISBN 0-11-340907-9) and in the "Guide to fire precautions in existing places of work that require a fire certificate (Factories, Offices, Shops and Railway Premises)" (ISBN 0-11-341079).
	That guidance will be replaced in due course by guidance to support the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, which will also cover the usage of artificial (or dried) foliage, tree, shrubs and flowers.

Local Area Agreements

David Drew: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister which local authorities have signed local area agreements; and (a) which services and (b) what expenditure are involved in each case.

Phil Woolas: 20 pilot local area agreements were signed in March 2005. These local authority areas and the local authorities included within each agreement are listed in the table. The anticipated expenditure related to each local area agreement as described in each agreement is also set out in the following table. The figures include funding that is being brought together in the local area to achieve the LAA as well as the funding provided directly by central Government.
	The pilot agreements are organised around three service blocks: the Safer and Stronger Communities block; the Healthier Communities and Older People block; and the Children and Young People's block. Future local area agreements will have a fourth block, the Economic Development and Enterprise block.
	
		
			 Area/local authorities included in the LAA Funding included in the LAA (£ million) 
		
		
			 Barnsley  
			 Barnsley Metropolitan Council 44 
			   
			 Bradford  
			 City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council 39 
			   
			 Brighton  
			 Brighton and Hove City Council 5 
			   
			 Coventry  
			 Coventry City Council 49 
			   
			 Derby  
			 Derby City Council 23 
			   
			 Derbyshire  
			 Derbyshire County Council 60 
			 Amber Valley Borough Council 60 
			 Erewash Borough Council 60 
			 The District of Bolsover 60 
			 Chesterfield Borough Council 60 
			 North East Derbyshire District Council 60 
			 High Peak Borough Council 60 
			 Derbyshire Dales District Council 60 
			 South Derbyshire District Council 60 
			   
			 Devon  
			 Devon County Council 16 
			 East Devon District Council 16 
			 Exeter City Council 16 
			 Mid Devon District Council 16 
			 North Devon District Council 16 
			 South Hams District Council 16 
			 Teignbridge District Council 16 
			 Torridge District Council 16 
			 West Devon Borough Council 16 
			   
			 Doncaster  
			 Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council 203 
			   
			 Dorset  
			 Dorset County Council 16 
			 Christchurch Borough Council 16 
			 East Dorset District Council 16 
			 North Dorset District Council 16 
			 Purbeck District Council West 16 
			 Dorset District Council 16 
			 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council 16 
			   
			 Gateshead  
			 Gateshead Council 47 
			   
			 Greenwich  
			 London Borough of Greenwich 17 
			   
			 Hammersmith and Fulham  
			 London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham 21 
			   
			 Kent  
			 Kent County Council 86 
			 Ashford Borough Council 86 
			 Canterbury City Council 86 
			 Dartford Borough Council 86 
			 Dover District Council 86 
			 Gravesham Borough Council 86 
			 Maidstone Borough Council 86 
			 Sevenoaks District Council 86 
			 Shepway District Council 86 
			 Swale Borough Council 86 
			 Thanet District Council 86 
			 Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council 86 
			 Tunbridge Wells Borough Council 86 
			 Knowsley  
			 Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council 18 
			   
			 Sheffield  
			 Sheffield City Council 18 
			   
			 Stockton  
			 Stockton-on-Tess Borough Council 24 
			   
			 Suffolk  
			 Suffolk County Council 80 
			 Babergh District Council 80 
			 Forest Heath District Council 80 
			 Ipswich Borough Council 80 
			 Mid Suffolk District Council 80 
			 St. Edmundsbury Borough Council 80 
			 Suffolk Coastal District Council 80 
			 Waveney District Council 80 
			   
			 Telford and Wrekin  
			 Borough of Telford and Wrekin 7 
			   
			 Wigan  
			 Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council 11 
			   
			 Wolverhampton  
			 Wolverhampton City Council 70 
			 Total 853

Safer

John Hemming: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister 
	(1)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Wear Valley, (ii) Westminster, (iii) Wigan and (iv) Wirral local authorities;
	(2)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Tower Hamlets, (ii) Wakefield , (iii) Waltham Forest, (iv) Wandsworth and (v) Wansbeck local authorities;
	(3)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Southwark, (ii) Stockton-on-Tees, (iii) Stoke-on-Trent, (iv) Sunderland and (v) Tameside local authorities;
	(4)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Sedgefield, (ii) Sefton, (iii) Sheffield, (iv) South Tyneside and (v) Southampton local authorities;
	(5)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Rochdale, (ii) Rotherham, (iii) St Helens, (iv) Salford and (v) Sandwell local authorities;
	(6)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Penwith, (ii) Plymouth, (iii) Portsmouth, (iv) Preston and (v) Redcar and Cleveland local authorities;
	(7)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Newham, (ii) North Tyneside, (iii) Nottingham, (iv) Oldham and (v) Pendle local authorities;
	(8)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Luton, (ii) Manchester, (iii) Mansfield, (iv) Middlesbrough and (v) Newcastle upon Tyne local authorities;
	(9)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Leeds, (ii) Leicester, (iii) Lewisham, (iv) Lincoln and (v) Liverpool local authorities;
	(10)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Kerrier, (ii) Kingston upon Hull, (iii) Kirklees, (iv) Knowsley and (v) Lambeth local authorities;
	(11)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Hartlepool, (ii) Hastings, (iii) Hyndburn, (iv) Islington and (v) Kennington and Chelsea local authorities;
	(12)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Greenwich, (ii) Hackney, (iii) Halton, (iv) Hammersmith and Fulham and (v) Haringey local authorities;
	(13)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Ealing, (ii) Easington, (iii) Enfield, (iv) Gateshead and (v) Great Yarmouth local authorities;
	(14)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Coventry, (ii) Croydon, (iii) Derby, (iv) Derwentside and (v) Dudley local authorities;
	(15)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i)Brent, (ii) Brighton and Hove, (iii) Bristol, (iv) Burnley and (v) Camden local authorities;
	(16)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Blackburn with Darwen, (ii) Blackpool, (iii) Bolsover, (iv) Bolton and (v) Bradford local authorities;
	(17)  what (a) the allocation from the Safer Stronger Communities Fund and (b) the population is for (i) Allerdale, (ii) Ashfield, (iii) Barking and Dagenham, (iv) Barnsley and (v) Barrow-in-Furness local authorities.

Phil Woolas: The Safer and Stronger Communities Fund brings together a number of programmes from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and the Home Office. Aggregate allocations in 2005–06 from both Departments are combined in the following table. Population estimates are from "T 10: Mid-2002 to Mid-2003 population estimates; components of population change for local authorities in England and Wales; Mid-2003 Population Estimates", published by the Office for National Statistics Population Estimates Unit, and reflect the local authority administrative boundaries that were in place on 1 April 2003.
	
		
			 Region/authority Safer and stronger communities fund allocation 2005-06 (£) Population estimate(43) 
		
		
			 London   
			 Barking and Dagenham 629,517 165,900 
			 Brent 1,067,592 267,800 
			 Camden 3,377,093 210,700 
			 City of Westminster 1,395,889 222,000 
			 Croydon 1,019,461 336,700 
			 Ealing 2,303,502 305,000 
			 Enfield 781,563 280,300 
			 Greenwich 3,154,168 223,700 
			 Hackney 1,694,127 208,400 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 682,625 174,200 
			 Haringey 1,312,976 224,700 
			 Islington 1,034,415 180,100 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 662,432 174,400 
			 Lambeth 1,386,905 268,500 
			 Lewisham 1,100,655 248,300 
			 Newham 1,809,733 250,600 
			 Southwark 1,702,932 253,800 
			 Tower Hamlets 1,243,324 206,600 
			 Waltham Forest 1,363,430 221,600 
			 Wandsworth 1,024,832 274,100 
			
			 South East   
			 Brighton and Hove 734,060 251,500 
			 Hastings 1,029,032 85,100 
			 Portsmouth 601,983 188,700 
			 Southampton 638,297 221,100 
			
			 South West   
			 City of Bristol UA 1,313,523 391,500 
			 Kerrier and Penwith 2,288,753 155,500 
			 Plymouth 738,685 241,500 
			
			 East   
			 Luton 1,995,490 184,000 
			 Great Yarmouth 461,633 92,100 
			
			 East Midlands   
			 Derby 809,488 233,200 
			 Bolsover 414,890 73,200 
			 Leicester 2,721,377 283,900 
			 Lincoln 378,829 86,000 
			 Nottingham 1,040,720 273,900 
			 Ashfield 298,914 112,600 
			 Mansfield 1,631,864 98,700 
			
			 West Midlands   
			 Coventry 2,776,432 305,000 
			 Dudley 2,296,081 304,800 
			 Sandwell 1,430,863 285,000 
			 Stoke on Trent 909,835 238,000 
			
			 Yorkshire and Humber   
			 Barnsley 1,480,002 220,200 
			 Bradford 1,720,270 477,800 
			 Kingston upon Hull 1,230,286 247,900 
			 Kirklees 1,639,673 391,400 
			 Leeds 2,359,743 715,200 
			 Rotherham 1,353,991 251,500 
			 Sheffield 3,258,430 512,500 
			 Wakefield 925,066 318,300 
			
			 North East   
			 Derwentside 1,223,564 85,600 
			 Easington 2,691,435 92,800 
			 Sedgefield 398,408 87,300 
			 Wear Valley 416,152 61,300 
			 Gateshead 807,446 191,000 
			 Hartlepool 618,526 90,200 
			 Middlesbrough 897,348 139,000 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 1,005,313 266,600 
			 North Tyneside 1,742,459 190,800 
			 Wansbeck 385,188 61,300 
			 South Tyneside 768,535 151,700 
			 Stockton 1,377,841 186,300 
			 Sunderland 1,064,355 283,100 
			
			 North West   
			 Blackburn with Darwen 2,476,794 139,800 
			 Blackpool 797,084 142,400 
			 Bolton 2,114,167 263,800 
			 Allerdale 393,244 94,500 
			 Barrow-in-Furness 406,933 70,600 
			 Halton 640,998 118,400 
			 Knowsley 885,930 150,200 
			 Burnley 445,261 88,500 
			 Hyndburn 405,224 81,700 
			 Pendle 450,972 89,300 
			 Preston 682,461 130,500 
			 Liverpool 2,450,452 441,800 
			 Manchester 3,180,864 432,500 
			 Oldham 928,771 218,100 
			 Rochdale 958,823 206,600 
			 Salford 1,082,729 216,500 
			 Sefton 878,937 281,600 
			 St. Helens 742,367 176,700 
			 Tameside 1,550,219 213,400 
			 Wigan 858,689 303,800 
			 Wirral 1,337,874 313,800 
		
	
	Source:
	http://www.statistics.qov.uk/StatBase/Expodata/Spreadsheets/D8560.xls

Sustainable Communities

Philip Hollobone: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what discussions his Department has had with the Treasury on securing developer contributions to fund key infrastructure for the sustainable communities growth strategy in Northamptonshire; and whether further legislation is required to implement the policy.

Yvette Cooper: holding answer 19 July 2005
	Officials from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and HM Treasury have not met specifically to discuss how to secure developer contributions for infrastructure in Northamptonshire, although work on infrastructure funding for the growth areas, including Milton Keynes and the South Midlands, is ongoing.
	Local authorities may seek developer contributions through planning obligations (also known as "section 106 agreements") under existing legislation. New legislation would be required for local authorities to seek contributions that go beyond the policy set out in the Government's Circular 05/2005 on planning obligations.

Sustainable Communities

Mark Lancaster: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister with which bodies in Milton Keynes he has discussed his Department's plans for sustainable communities.

Yvette Cooper: The plans for the sustainable communities have had a long gestation and have included wide community participation. Regional Planning Guidance 9(2001) recommended an interregional study should be undertaken to consider the further development of the Milton Keynes sub-region. This was followed by the Milton Keynes and South Midlands study (2002) and subsequent growth area assessments, all of which were steered by a full range of stakeholders. "Sustainable communities: building for the future", published by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in 2003, announced three new growth areas, including Milton Keynes South Midlands (MKSM), and identified key steps for taking them forward.
	All interested bodies and members of the community in Milton Keynes and elsewhere had the opportunity to participate in the formulation of the MKSM Sub-Regional Strategy, which sets out the strategic plan for the area up to 2031. The first consultations on the MKSM Sub-Regional Strategy (July to October 2003) produced 1,600 responses. There then followed a public examination by an independent panel who produced their report in August 2004. In response to the panel's recommendations my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister the First Secretary of State, via his Government Offices, consulted on the proposed changes to the MKSM Sub-Regional Strategy. Over 3,000 copies of this document were distributed with 426 representations received. These were considered before publishing the final MKSM Sub-Regional Strategy in March 2005.
	Further details can be found in "Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub-Regional Strategy—Summary of Public Consultation on the Secretary of State's Proposed Changes" (available via www.gose.gov.uk). See also "Sustainable Communities: An Urban Development Area for Milton Keynes: Consultation Summary and Decision Document" (available via www.odpm.gov.uk) for further information on the consultation process leading up to the establishment of Milton Keynes Partnerships Committee, the local delivery vehicle for Milton Keynes.

Telecommunications Masts

David Burrowes: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister 
	(1)  whether Government guidance requires consideration of the cumulative impact of a number of masts in close proximity on the (a) environment and (b) health of local residents;
	(2)  whether Government guidance requires consideration of the health implications arising from an intensity of beam of electromagnetic field when a number of masts are located in close proximity.

Caroline Flint: I have been asked to reply.
	The research on health effects from radiofrequency electromagnetic fields was comprehensively reviewed by the National Radiological Protection Board's (NRPB) independent advisory group on non-ionising radiation in 2003. The review concluded that
	"Exposure levels from living near to mobile phone base stations are extremely low and the overall evidence indicates that they are unlikely to pose a risk to health"
	The NRPB, now part of the Health Protection Agency (HPA), has posted the results of its base station exposure measurements on its website, with an explanation of the effect of other masts in the vicinity. This is available at:
	www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/understand/information sheets/mobile telephony/base stations.htm.
	In addition, an audit of more than 450 measurements of exposure around base stations undertaken by Ofcom over the last four years demonstrate that none has exceeded the electromagnetic field exposure guidelines of the international commission on non-ionising radiation.
	Nevertheless, in view of the public concern and the precautionary approach to the use of these new technologies recommended by the Stewart Report (2000) and the NRPB's "Mobile Phones and Health 2004" report, the mobile telecommunications and health research programme is supporting studies on the possible effects from mobile phone radio waves.

Work-related Stress

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many cases of work-related stress have been reported in his Department in each of the last three years; how much compensation was paid to employees in each year; how many work days were lost due to work-related stress in each year; at what cost; what procedures have been put in place to reduce work-related stress; at what cost; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister was created on 29 May 2002. The number of cases of work-related stress as categorised by staff is set out in the following table:
	
		
			  Cases reported and categorised as "work related stress" by staff Days lost Cost (£000) 
		
		
			 1 June 2002 to 31 March 200347 1,263 85 
			 1 April 2003 to 31March 200468 1,752 116 
			 1 April 2004 to 31 March 200571 1,951 162 
		
	
	No compensation has been paid to employees for any stress related case since the Office was established.
	Individual staff are responsible for reporting and recording short term absence according to what they perceive the cause to be. Longer term absence results in referral to our Medical Adviser who confirms the cause. Therefore in a number of cases the cause of stress may actually be factors outside the work place, for example, domestic or financial pressures.
	The Office is committed to identifying and reducing the causes of work related stress and to supporting staff who may suffer from work related stress. Within the Office staff have access to a Counselling and Support Service and advice and support from the Occupational Health Adviser, line managers and Human Resources. The Office is currently assessing the Heath and Safety Executive Stress Management Standards and their potential use in the Office.

Al-Qaeda

Lembit �pik: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment the Government have made of the stated objectives of al-Qaeda; and if he will make a statement.

Ian Pearson: We conduct frequent assessments of the stated objectives and motivations of al-Qaeda terrorists and their associates. The real objective of these terrorists is clear:
	it is to conduct indiscriminate attacks where and when they can, to try to bring countries and their communities into conflict.

Correspondence

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many letters to his Department from hon. Members in session (a) 2004-05 and (b) 2005-06 remain unanswered, broken down by those which are (i) one month old, (ii) two months old, (iii) three months old, (iv) four months old and (v) over six months old.

Jack Straw: Details of letters to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, from both hon. Members and others, are stored together in such a way that this information is not retrievable without incurring a disproportionate cost. The Cabinet Office, on an annual basis, publishes a report to Parliament on the performance of departments in replying to hon. Members'/Peers' correspondence. The Report for 2004 was published on 6 April 2005, Official Report, columns 137-140WS, and showed that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office responded to 83 per cent. of letters from hon. Members and Peers within the 20 working day target.

Non-settlement Visas

David Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many applications for non-settlement visas were (a) received and (b) refused in (i) Bangladesh, (ii) Algeria, (iii) Morocco, (iv) Tunisia and (v) Ghana in each of the last five years; and what proportion of those were granted at Tier One.

Kim Howells: The information on applications for visitors visas for the countries and categories requested, is as follows:
	
		Number
		
			  Bangladesh Algeria Morocco Tunisia Ghana 
		
		
			 Non-settlement applications (NSA) received 
			 1999-2000 14,983 3,370 7,410 7,066 27,457 
			 2000-01 17,291 (43)0 7,905 7,559 33,095 
			 2001-02 22,132 5,315 6,721 6,746 45,212 
			 2002-03 25,251 12,219 7,186 4,647 64,455 
			 2003-04 34,041 15,423 6,721 4,944 81,940 
			   
			 NSA refused
			 1999-2000 3,363 (43)0 433 1,072 5,246 
			 2000-01 3,613 (43)0 402 1,128 7,536 
			 2001-02 6,242 (43)0 251 1,036 20,532 
			 2002-03 9,396 1,859 339 729 33,417 
			 2003-04 10,313 4,148 615 644 44,020 
		
	
	
		Tier One non-settlement applications -- Percentage
		
			  Bangladesh Algeria Morocco Tunisia Ghana 
		
		
			 1999-2000 95 100 97 98 95 
			 2000-01 97 (43)0 97 99 93 
			 2001-02 95 100 93 96 99 
			 2002-03 97 100 99 97 98 
			 2003-04 91 100 90 98 91 
		
	
	(43) While UKvisas makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of statistics, they are not liable for technical errors or omissions contained in published figures. In addition, some posts do not forward certain statistics and occasional or permanent closures can also affect figures.
	Statistics for the proportion of non-settlement visas granted at Tier One, applications where decisions are made without the need for an interview, are not available. The figures provided represent the percentage of non-settlement visa applications, which include visit visas, that were dealt with at Tier One within 24 hours

Palestine

Dan Norris: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the (a) organisations and (b) projects operating in (i) Israel and (ii) the Palestinian territories being (A) funded and (B) partially sponsored by his Department.

Ian Pearson: The projects listed are funded by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) through the Global Opportunities Fund (GOF), the Global Conflict Prevention Pool (GCPPwhich is jointly funded by FCO, MOD and DFID) and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office Directorate Programme Budget (DPB).
	Further information about these funds is available on the FCO website at: www.fco.gov.uk.
	(i) Organisations/projects in Israel:
	1. Ir AminChanging public information and discourse around Jerusalem.
	2. Economic Co-operation Foundation (ECF)Making disengagement work.
	3. Peace Nowmonitoring expansion of Israeli settlements (co-funded with Norwegians).
	4. UK-Israeli academic co-operation on nanotechnology.
	5. Hand in Hand Centre for Jewish Arab education in Israel.
	6. Football for Peace(co-sponsor) implemented by British Council.
	7. MerchavimShared citizenship project for training Arab-Israeli teachers.
	(ii) Organisations/projects in occupied territories:
	1. Palestinian Authoritysupport to Palestinian civil policecompletion of training centre for National Security Forces.
	2. Search For Common GroundPalestinian media activities in support of the roadmap.
	3. International Service for Human Rightstraining in partnership with National Human Rights Institution, Ramallah.
	4. Palestinian Central Elections Commission (CEC) members' election visit to the UK.
	5. Training for one Palestinian journalist at School for Oriental and African studies (SOAS).
	6. Refurbishment of computers for two Palestinian Authority school libraries.
	7. Support Central Elections Commission by helping to pay for English language training for member of CEC staff.
	8. Peres peace centretraining for Palestinian school teachers.
	9. Habla Refugee Camp sports project.
	10. Support for Kobar village school library.
	(iii) Joint organisations/projects:
	1. EXACTjoint Israeli/Palestinian/Jordanian project focusing on water resources.
	2. Shared Citizenship education project.

Sickness Absence

David Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many days the Department has lost due to sickness in the past five years for which figures are available.

Jack Straw: Total recorded days of sickness absence for staff in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) were:
	
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 2000 (44)20,900 
			 2001 25,012 
			 2002 27,720 
			 2003 33,219 
			 2004 35,969 
		
	
	(44) Estimate, based on available data.
	Data collection over this period has been complicated by the introduction of new Pay and Management Information systems. It is therefore possible that the figures given do not reflect consistent recording methods. FCO is currently working to improve both accuracy and detail in this area.
	Per capita sickness absence in the FCO has been consistently below the public sector average. In 2003 it was recorded at 5.6 days per person. The date showed a slight rise in 2004 to six days per person. This is likely to be the result of better management control/reporting and the introduction of new IT systems.
	The FCO is fully committed to implementing the recommendations in the recently published Managing Sickness Absence in the Public Sector. A new FCO health care contract which started in April 2005 includes a comprehensive occupational health service aimed at better and more proactive management of long and short-term sickness absence.

Sir Michael Jay

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when Sir Michael Jay was asked to adjust his duties in relation to the G8; whether this constituted a formal redeployment; when he will return to his principal duties as Permanent Under-Secretary; and if he will make a statement.

Jack Straw: My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister appointed Sir Michael Jay as his G8 Sherpa on 17 January 2005 for the duration of the UK presidency. Sir Michael took on this duty in addition to his duties as Permanent Under-Secretary at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Head of HM Diplomatic Service. There was no formal redeployment.

United Nations

Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he is taking to improve the governance of the United Nations.

Ian Pearson: In September 2005 the UN Millennium Review Summit will address recommendations on reform of the UN system put forward by the UN Secretary-General in his report In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights for All.
	The Government welcome these proposals and hope to build on them at the summit. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary, in his meetings with the UN Secretary-General, has highlighted the importance that the UK attaches to improved governance at the UN.
	The UK has identified four areas of governance where we would like to see specific actions taken:
	Accountabilityoversight capacity within the UN must be strengthened, and its independence and authority enhanced.
	Professionalism and modernisationthere must be transparent, competence based recruitment throughout the UN system and the introduction of modern human rights practices.
	Efficiencyactivity at the UN should be rationalised, modernised and streamlined to reduce duplication and to focus on priority areas.
	Flexibilityin return for the measures mentioned above, the Secretary-General should be provided with the authority and flexibility to manage resources and to redeploy them according to need.
	In addition, we want to see a Security Council that reflects today's world and the contributions of the UN's members to its objectives. The UK therefore supports the expansion of both the permanent and non-permanent membership.

Health and Safety

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps are taken to protect the hearing of British servicemen and women in the armed forces during active service.

Don Touhig: The Ministry of Defence, like all UK employers, is subject to the Health and Safety Executive Noise at Work Regulations (NAWR) 1989. These require employers to take certain actions where any of their employees is likely to be exposed to noise at or above any of the three action levels set out in the Regulations. MOD procedures meet, and in many instances exceed, both these requirements and those of the Physical Agents (Noise) Directive (PA(N)D), which comes into force in February 2006. The instructions promulgated by the armed forces to their personnel are summarised as follows.
	Navy:
	Under the new regulations set out in the PA(N)D, RN warships will have until 2011 to comply with the prescribed weekly and daily limits. In 2003 the RN introduced a hearing conservation programme to ensure compliance with NAWR 1989. This programme requires noise assessments to be carried out where personnel may be at risk from noise-induced hearing damage. Where such a risk is identified commanding officers are required to identify persons at risk, provide those potentially affected with information and awareness training, put in suitable control measures to mitigate this risk, which may include the provision of suitable hearing protection, and ensure that potentially affected personnel are provided with audiometry assessments at a frequency determined by the level of risk. Hearing protective equipment that is available to personnel complies with British Standards.
	Army:
	Hearing protection forms part of a serviceman's personal equipment that he will carry with him on operations. Additionally, hearing protection is included in the equipment schedule of the equipment that the serviceman may be operating. Whether or not the hearing protection will be worn by an individual at any one time will depend upon the role and duties of the particular individual and will, additionally, be dependant upon the hostile threat.
	RAF:
	Where RAF personnel work in an area that is deemed a noise hazard, hearing protection is issued on an individual basis. The wearing of such protection is made mandatory in the RAF at the First Action Level of NAWR 1989, which exceeds NAWR recommendations. In addition, noise assessments are conducted to determine the level and type of hearing protection required, and any member of staff working in such an area is managed via the Hearing Conservation Programme (HCP) which includes annual audiometry testing. This concurs, and in certain areas exceeds, the recommendations made by the NAWR 1989. Whether this protection is worn during times of hostile activity will depend not only on the hostile threat but also the role and duties of personnel involved.
	We are also working with HSE on the need for hearing protection for military band personnel.

McKinsey and Co.

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many contracts have been awarded to McKinsey and Co. since 1 January 2000; how many and what percentage of contract awards followed a competitive tendering process; and what the cost of each contract is.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 11 July 2005
	The Ministry of Defence has awarded McKinsey and Co. 15 contracts since 1 January 2000.
	
		
		
			 Project Contract Cost 
		
		
			 Development of the DLO (Defence Logistics Organisation) Change Programme Benefits Tracking Process 217,000 
			 Support to Equipment Capability 200,000 
			 Consultancy Support for the Implementation of the SMART Procurement Initiative 340,000 
			 Support to the MOD Change Programme 2,223,000 
			 Support to the DLO Procurement Review Group 2,445,000 
			 Support to E2E (End to End) Review of Air and Land Environments 4,985,000 
			 Re-Invigorating SMART Acquisition within the DPA 300,000 
			 Support to the Implementation and Rollout of the DLO Benefits Tracking Tool 360,000 
			 Bridging Consulting Support to E2E Detailed Planning 1,000,000 
			 Support to the Procurement Reform Project 6,996,000 
			 Support to Implementation of E2E Detailed Planning 10,625,000 
			 Support to Eurofighter Project 182,500 
			 Consultancy Support for the Strategic Partner to the DLO Transformation Programme 22,841,280 
			 Consultancy support in applying the principles and techniques of the Lean Process Design to the E2E Support Chain 220,000 
			 Consultancy Support to the Business Management System Review 75,000 
		
	
	Note:
	These figures show the cost of each contract: some contracts are not yet completed and further payments are scheduled.
	Five of these contracts (33 per cent.) were competitively tendered. In addition, seven contracts (47 per cent.) were placed with McKinsey and Co. on a single source basis, since they related to work that had already been placed with the company following competitive tender.
	In addition details of the Department's spend on External Assistance (EA) has been reported to Ministers since 199596 and summaries have been placed in the Library of the House.

Mental Health

Chris Bryant: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many people left the (a) Army, (b) Navy and (c) Royal Air Force due to mental health problems in each of the last 10 years.

Don Touhig: In the 10 year period 19952004, 1,355 Regular Service personnel were medically discharged from the UK armed forces due to a condition categorised to the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision, Chapter 5 Mental and behavioural disorders. A breakdown by Service and year of medical discharge is provided in Table A.
	
		Table A: UK regular armed forces medically discharged for mental and behavioural disorders, 19952004
		
			 Service Army Naval Service RAF 
		
		
			 Total 840 289 226 
			 1995 79 22 27 
			 1996 49 26 19 
			 1997 88 16 18 
			 1998 98 31 18 
			 1999 58 25 18 
			 2000 64 42 21 
			 2001 103 30 23 
			 2002 112 38 11 
			 2003 86 35 25 
			 2004 103 24 46 
		
	
	Note:
	Medical discharges between the Services should not be compared due to the different fitness levels required by each Service (and within different cadres) and the employment policy of each Service.

Meteorological Office

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many (a) military and (b) civilian weather observation stations and weather centres there are in the UK, broken down by location; which stations have closed since 2001, broken down by date of closure; and which stations have been identified for closure.

Don Touhig: There are 27 meteorological stations responsible for forecasting and observing based at military locations. Their locations are:
	Scotland
	Kinloss
	Leuchars
	Lossiemouth
	South Uist
	Wales
	Aberporth
	Valley
	England
	Benson
	Boscombe Down
	Brize Norton
	Coltishall
	Coningsby
	Cranwell
	Dishforth
	High Wycombe
	Larkhill
	Leeming
	Linton on Ouse
	Lyneham
	Middle Wallop
	Northolt
	Odiham
	Shawbury
	St. Mawgan
	Waddington
	Wattisham
	Wittering
	Northern Ireland
	Belfastresponsibility for both military and civil forecasting
	There are eight civil forecasting stations:
	Aberdeen Dyce
	Aberdeen
	Cardiff
	Birmingham
	London
	London Heathrow
	London Media
	Manchester
	There are nine civil observation sites:
	Edinburgh
	Eskdalemuir
	Glasgow
	Lerwick
	Camborne
	Crawley
	Lathom
	Tilbury
	Watnall
	The following stations have closed since 2001:
	Boulmer (1 March 2002)
	Bristol (9 May 2001)
	Eskmeals (6 April 2001)
	Glasgow (18 September 2003)
	Kirkwall (1 August 2001)
	Leeds (19 September 2001)
	Manchester Airport (1 November 2004)
	Newcastle (30 July 2001)
	SellaNess (1 April 2004)
	Stornoway (1 September 2002)
	Tiree (1 August 2001)
	The following station closures are planned:
	London Heathrow (November 2005) civil
	Aberdeen Dyce (February 2006) civil
	Coltishall (April 2006) military
	In addition, it is planned to reduce the operation at Eskdalemuir.

Nuclear Deterrent

Michael Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  what discussions (a) he and (b) officials in his Department have had with United States officials regarding the replacement of Trident; whom they involved; when they took place; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what discussions (a) he and (b) officials in his Department have had with (i) UK defence companies and (ii) overseas defence companies regarding the replacement of Trident; whom they involved; when they took place; and if he will make a statement.

Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent discussions his Department has had with US counterparts about the next generation of the UK nuclear deterrent.

Alex Salmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his US counterparts on the replacement of the Trident nuclear weapons system.

John Reid: No decisions have yet been taken on any replacement for Trident. Information obviously needs to be gathered from a variety of sources to support these future decisions, but it is not our general practice to comment on the detail of any such discussions with other Governments and industry.

Portsmouth Dockyard

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the future of the PRIME project for developing the dockyard in Portsmouth.

Don Touhig: The purpose of project PRIME (the Portsmouth Regeneration and Investment in the Maritime Estate project) was to release part of the Portsmouth naval base estate for development. Work on PRIME has been halted after concerns emerged about the effect that proceeding with the project would have on the base's operational role. A key requirement, stated at the outset of the project, was to safeguard full operational capability of the base. After careful analysis it has been decided that the constraints that a development of this nature, in the heart of the historic dockyard, might place on operational capability outweigh the potential benefits of the scheme. Survey and technical work undertaken by the project will be fully utilised during the exploration of other options for the use of elements of the naval base estate.
	The Ministry of Defence's commitment to Portsmouth, as demonstrated by the move there of the fleet headquarters in 2002, will continue. It is to be the base for the next generation of warships and this represents a major investment that will preserve and enhance jobs in the area and safeguard Portsmouth's role as an operational naval base at the heart of the city's economic activity.

Second World War (60th Anniversary)

Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what financial support he has provided to the Royal Commonwealth Ex-Services League in relation to the commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the end of the second world war.

Don Touhig: The Ministry of Defence has not provided financial support to the Royal Commonwealth Ex-Services League in relation to events commemorating the 60th anniversary of the end of the second world war.
	The MOD provided financial support to those organisations who applied for administrative costs in support of the Veterans Awareness Week which culminated in the events on 10 July 2005 to mark the 60th anniversary of the end of the second world war. We have no record of such an application from the Royal Commonwealth Ex-Services League.

A2

David Evennett: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what surveys have been undertaken by his Department in the past year of traffic flows on the A2 through Bexley borough.

Stephen Ladyman: DfT has three locations on the A2, in the London borough of Bexley, at which traffic flow counts are conducted. The table provides details on these three locations with the traffic survey 12-hour raw data results for both 2004 and 2005.
	
		
			  Traffic flow 'Count point' 
			  26,102 36,497 6,097 
		
		
			 Date counted in 2004 15 October 23 June (46)not counted 
			 12-hour motorised traffic from 2004 survey(47) 72,892 83,504 n/a 
			 
			 Date counted in 2005 26 April 19 April 9 May 
			 12-hour motorised traffic from 2005 survey(47) 71,741 80,531 84,611 
			 
			 Start of road link Greenwich boundary Junction with A221 Junction with A223 
			 End of road link Junction with A221 Junction with A223 Kent boundary 
		
	
	(46) Not all major road 'Count Point' sites for surveying traffic are included in the sample for the survey every year.
	(47) At each Count point, weekday counts are made of 11 vehicle types for the 12 hours from 7am to 7pm. They are scheduled to minimise the effects of possible seasonal factors etc., by counting during neutral weeks, in March, April, May, June, September and October.
	The 12-hour Road Traffic Survey figures are used to make estimates of the Annual Average Daily Flow (AADF) of traffic on the link. Estimates of AADFs in 2004 were published on 7 July 2005. The estimates for these particular traffic Count Points are given in the following table.
	
		
			  Traffic flow 'Count point' 
			  26,102 36,497 6,097 
		
		
			 Pedal cycles AADF 10 12 13 
			 Motorcycles 2,269 1,793 3,104 
			 Cars and taxis 71,838 84,577 81,555 
			 Buses and coaches 452 794 492 
			 Light goods vehicles 12,070 14,030 14,927 
			 Heavy goods vehicles 4,867 4,811 6,241 
			 All motorised vehicles 91,496 106,005 106,319

Car Clubs

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has to evaluate the effects his Department's report Smarter Choices: Changing the Way we Travel and Making Smarter Choice Work and Making Car Sharing and Car Clubs Work have had on the development of car clubs and car sharing.

Karen Buck: We evaluate as a matter of course the effectiveness of our programmes to promote smarter choices, such as the travelling to school initiative and the sustainable travel towns project. However, it would not be practical or cost-effective to carry out individual evaluations of research reports and good practice guides. We will instead be monitoring the take up of sustainable travel measures as part of our work with local authorities on the development and implementation of local transport plans.

Crossrail

Sharon Hodgson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent research his Department has undertaken into the benefits of Crossrail.

Derek Twigg: holding answer 20 July 2005
	On 5 July 2005, the Secretary of State placed in the Library a paper called Transport, Wider Economic Benefits, and Impacts on GDP. This paper looks at transport schemes more generally but includes an assessment of the benefits of Crossrail, drawing on the economic appraisal for Crossrail carried out by Cross London Rail Linksthe Crossrail development companyand including wider benefits not previously quantified in the Department's appraisal methodology.
	In addition, my Department conducted a modelling exercise in 2003 to examine the potential impact of population and employment growth, land use changes and airport development on the transport networks in South East England in 2016. The results of this exercise, including an assessment of the impact of Crossrail, were placed in the Library on 19 July 2005.

East London Line

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport 
	(1)  what recent discussions he has had with Transport for London about the disruption to passenger services as work progresses on the East London line extensions;
	(2)  what recent discussions he has had with Transport for London concerning the timetable for construction of the East London line extensions and progress on Phase 2 of the extensions;
	(3)  what recent discussions he has had with Transport for London on the closure of the central section of the East London line, north of New Cross Gate to Shoreditch, during work on the East London line extensions.

Derek Twigg: Regular meetings are held between the Secretary of State and Transport for London on rail issues but no specific discussions have taken place on the points raised in the questions.

Miss Shriti Vadera

Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list (a) discussions and (b) meetings (i) officials and (ii) Ministers in his Department had with Miss Shriti Vadera during 2001, broken down by (A) date and (B) subject.

Derek Twigg: holding answer 19 July 2005
	The information requested could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

Motoring Offences

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the new motoring offences created by legislation sponsored by his Department since 1997.

Stephen Ladyman: The expression motoring offences has been interpreted fairly widely and taken to include matters relating to vehicle approvals, construction and use of vehicles, traffic regulation, vehicle licensing and registration, number plates and suppliers thereof, carriage of dangerous goods and radioactive material, private hire vehicles, the wearing of seat belts and the testing for drink and drugs.
	In many cases there is a provision in primary legislation which provides that it is an offence to contravene or fail to comply with statutory instruments made thereunder. Such instruments are listed but only those which were made on or after 29 May 2002 as that was the date on which this Department came into being.
	Similarly, only primary legislative provisions created on or after that date are listed save where regulations listed have an effect upon what may constitute an offence under those provisions.
	The relevant legislative provisions have been placed in the Libraries of the House.

Rail Freight

Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has to encourage the transfer of movements of heavy freight loads from road to rail.

Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps his Department is taking to make the carriage of freight by rail more attractive.

Derek Twigg: I would refer the hon. Members to the statement the Secretary of State made on 19 July 2005, Official Report, column 7173WS, setting out the Government's policy towards rail freight.

Railtrack

Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list (a) meetings and (b) discussions (i) Ministers and (ii) officials in his Department had with Treasury Ministers and officials during (A) 2001 and (B) 2002 concerning railway ownership, broken down by (1) date, (2) attendees and (3) subject; and if he will place the minutes of meetings in the Library.

Derek Twigg: holding answer 19 July 2005
	The information requested could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

Railways

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much Government subsidy per passenger mile each UK rail franchise received in the period April 2004 to April 2005.

Derek Twigg: holding answer 19 July 2005
	The subsidies paid to each train operating company (TOC), along with the corresponding passenger kilometres travelled for the period 1 April 2004 to 31 March 2005 are set out in table 6.2b of National Rail Trends which was published by the Strategic Rail Authority on 24 June 2005. That table is reproduced as follows:
	
		Table 6.2b Subsidy per passenger kilometre by train operating company 200405
		
			  Passenger kilometres (million) Subsidy ( million) Subsidy per passenger kilometre (pence) 200304 Subsidy per passenger kilometre (pence) 
		
		
			 Arriva Trains Northern(49) 696.5 112.0 16.1 16.9 
			 Arriva Trains Wales 853.1 93.9 11.0 18.0 
			 C2c 853.2 5.1 0.6 2.4 
			 Central Trains(49) 1,428.2 155.6 10.9 10.8 
			 Chiltern Railways 715.4 14.0 2.0 3.8 
			 First Great Western 2,718.2 (34.6) (1.3) 1.2 
			 First Great Western Link 1,602.2 (9.9) (0.9) (0.5) 
			 First North Western(49) 467.7 99.5 21.3 23.9 
			 First Scotrail(49) 992.6 57.2 5.8  
			 Gatwick Express 227.2 (18.3) (8.1) (6.6) 
			 GNER 4,063.8 (67.0) (1.6) (0.6) 
			 Island Line 6.6 3.2 48.2 46.8 
			 Midland Mainline 1,322.2 (9.0) (0.7) (0.3) 
			 Northern Rail(49) 475.3 81.0 17.0  
			 ONE 3,680.4 (45.0) (1.2)  
			 Scotrail(49) 1,231.1 106.4 8.6 12.9 
			 Silverlink 1,054.3 30.1 2.9 4.9 
			 South Eastern Trains 3,406.9 70.4 2.1 3.8 
			 South West Trains 4,605.8 38.6 0.8 2.7 
			 Southern 2,913.6 71.1 2.4 3.3 
			 Thameslink 1,413.8 (49.7) (3.5) (3.0) 
			 TPE 776.0 43.5 5.6 25.2 
			 Virgin CrossCountry 2,541.7 111.0 4.4 9.2 
			 Virgin West Coast 2,720.6 89.8 3.3 12.1 
			 WAGN 1,388.9 0.5 0.0 0.5 
			 Wessex Trains 462.4 56.0 12.1 17.9 
			  
			 All operators 42,077.8 1,005.4   
			  
			 Average subsidy per passenger kilometre (pence)   2.4 5.0 
		
	
	(49) Operators are part funded by PTEs. Where a PTE retains revenue risk, it pays the gross operating costs less the actual revenue. The subsidy figures in the table are based on the assumed revenue levels, either set out in the Franchise Agreement or based on actuals provided by the PTEs. This, however, may overstate the actual subsidy paid where it has been based on the Franchise Agreement. Actual subsidy per kilometre figures may therefore be less than stated for these operators.
	Notes:
	1. Subsidy figures are stated on a cash basis and exclude any payments under the incentive regimes but include adjustments made to reflect the consequences of the Regulator's charges review. Figures in brackets show where the SRA is in receipt of payments.
	2. 200405 represents the period 1 April 2004 to 31 March 2005, with the exception of Arriva Trains Northern, which is from 1 April 2004 to 11 December 2004; First North Western which is from 1 April 2004 to 11 December 2004; Northern, which is from 12 December 2004 to 31 March 2005; ScotRail which is from 1 April 2004 to 16 October 2004; and First Scot Rail, which is from 17 October 2004 to 31 March 2005.
	3. In 200304 franchise was operated by Thames Trains.
	4. 200304 represents the period 1 April 2003 to 31 March 2004, with the exception of Arriva Trains Wales, which is from 8 December 2003 to 31 March 2004; South Eastern Trains, which is from 9 November 2003 to 31 March 2004; and TransPennine Express, which is from 2 February 2004 to 31 March 2004.
	5. Merseyrail is not included in this table as it is no longer franchised by the SRA.
	As the notes to this table explain, adjustments to the subsidy profile have been made to reflect the consequences of the ORR's December 2003 Access Charges Review. One of the effects of this review was to allow for some funds which would otherwise have been paid to TOCs from the SRA and then passed through to Network Rail (NR), to be paid by the SRA to NR directly. This had the effect of reducing the subsidy payments made to the TOCs (or increasing the premium payable by them).
	The amount paid direct to Network Rail in the financial year 200405 was around 1.8 billion. Taking this direct funding into account the true subsidy per passenger kilometre for 200405 across the network is around 6.6 pence.

Abortion

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what recent discussions she has had with the leaders of the medical profession about interpretation by them of section 4 of the Abortion Act 1967; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  what guidelines her Department (a) has issued and (b) plans to issue to NHS primary care trusts setting out the rights of (i) general practitioners and (ii) nurses under section 4 of the Abortion Act 1967; and if she will make a statement;
	(3)  what guidance her Department has issued to doctors about their right of conscientious objection to taking part in abortion;
	(4)  whether it is her policy to require (a) general practitioners and (b) nurses to sign a declaration that they have no conscientious objection to performing or assisting at an abortion; and if she will make a statement;
	(5)  what guidance her Department issues to doctors with a conscientious objection to abortion regarding transfer of patients to other doctors;
	(6)  when it became a requirement for a physician who intends to rely on section 4 of the Abortion Act 1967 to refer a patient to another physician who does not have a conscientious objection; and if she will make a statement;
	(7)  if she will introduce legislation to amend section 4 of the Abortion Act 1967 to remove the duty on a physician with a conscientious objection to treatment under the Act from referring a patient to another physician who does not have such a conscientious objection; and if she will make a statement;
	(8)  if she will introduce legislation to remove the Proviso in Section 4 of the Abortion Act 1967; and if she will make a statement.

Caroline Flint: Section 4 of the Abortion Act 1967, as amended, states that except where treatment is necessary to save the life of or prevent grave permanent injury to the pregnant woman:
	no person shall be under any duty, whether by contract or by any statutory or other legal requirement, to participate in any treatment authorised by this Act to which he has a conscientious objection.
	The House of Lords ruled in 1988 that this exemption does not extend to giving advice, performing the preparatory steps to arrange an abortion where the request meets legal requirements and undertaking administration connected with abortion procedures. Doctors with a conscientious objection to abortion should make their views known to the patient and enable the patient to see another doctor without delay if that is the patient's wish. No recent discussion have taken place between the Secretary of State for Health and leaders of the medical profession on the interpretation of this ruling.
	The General Medical Council's (GMC) booklet, Good Medical Practice, states that general practitioners' views about a patient's lifestyle or beliefs must not prejudice the treatment they provide or arrange. If they feel their beliefs might affect the treatment, this must be explained to the patient, who should be told of their right to see another doctor. Breach of this guidance may expose a doctor to a charge of serious professional misconduct and disciplinary action by the GMC.
	The Department has issued guidance on best practice where there are ethical objections to abortion, through the Recommended Standards for Sexual Health Services, produced for the Department by the Medical Foundation for AIDS and Sexual Health.
	The National Health Service (General Medical Services Contracts) Regulations 2004 include details of additional services, including contraceptive services, which states that:
	where the contractor has a conscientious objection to the termination of pregnancy, prompt referral to another provider of primary medical services who does not have such conscientious objections.
	It is accepted Parliamentary practice that proposals for changes in the law on abortion have come from back-bench members and that decisions are made on the basis of free votes. The Government has no plans to change the law on abortion.

Abortion

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  if she will seek to establish when and how each of the current methods of abortion used in British hospitals and clinics was developed; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  what assessment she has made of whether the partial-birth abortion procedure is practised in the UK.

Caroline Flint: The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists' (RCOG) evidence-based clinical guideline, The Care of Women Requesting Induced Abortion, published in 2004, sets out the recommended methods of abortion which practitioners are expected to follow. Any new methods of abortion will be developed and researched in the same way as any other new medical procedure and will be subject to the same safety monitoring and licensing controls.
	Methods of termination are monitored through the forms sent to the Chief Medical Officer by practitioners for every termination of pregnancy they perform. We are not aware of the procedure referred to as partial-birth abortion being used in Great Britain.

Abortion

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average cost of performing an abortion was in (a) national health service hospitals and (b) private hospitals, in each of the last three years for which figures are available.

Caroline Flint: The available information is shown in the table.
	
		National average unit cost of performing an abortion in NHS hospitals and private hospitals
		
			  NHS trusts(50) Non-NHS providers(51) 
		
		
			 200102 441 n/a 
			 200203 486 286 
			 200304 503 332 
		
	
	n/a = not available.
	(50) Data based on admitted activity, excluding excess bed days, in NHS Trusts in England.
	(51) Data based on admitted activity, excluding excess bed days, submitted by NHS trusts and PCTs in England for activity contracted out to or directly commissioned from non-NHS providers. Data received from NHS trusts and PCTs for abortions performed in the independent sector under NHS contract is incomplete and therefore can only provide an indication of the likely cost of abortion performed in the independent sector. The Department of Health does not collect data on the costs of privately funded abortions.
	Source:
	National Schedule of Reference Costs

Agenda for Change

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether she has fully funded the NHS for the costs its has incurred from implementing Agenda for Change; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: In England, the Government have made available around 1 billion of extra investment by 200506 to meet the costs of implementing Agenda for Change. This is in addition to money needed to meet the costs of the general pay uplift of around 10 per cent. over three years to 200506, agreed as part of the Agenda for Change package. This is a huge investment and, while we do not underestimate the challenge of implementing Agenda for Change, we believe that this investment is sufficient to fully fund its implementation this year.

Ambulance Service

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what guidelines have been issued on moving patients with head injuries from Chorley Accident and Emergency to Preston Accident and Emergency by taxi rather than ambulance;
	(2)  if she will ensure that patients are not transported between Chorley and Preston accident and emergency departments in taxis without appropriate escort;
	(3)  under what circumstances taxis may be used to move patients between accident and emergency departments in Lancashire.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 18 July 2005
	It is for the local national health service to ensure appropriate transport and governance arrangements are in place to support the transfer of patients between accident and emergency departments.
	The NHS Modernisation Agency issued Driving Change: Good practice guidelines for Primary Care Trusts on commissioning arrangements for emergency ambulance services and non-emergency patient transport services in September 2004.
	In 1991, the Department issued guidance on Ambulance and other patient transport services: Operation, use and performance standards, which includes reference to performance standards and quality of service issues.
	Copies of both documents are available in the Library.

Ambulance Service

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the powers available to her in relation to the operation of ambulance trusts.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 18 July 2005
	The Secretary of State has the following powers in relation to national health service trusts, including ambulance trusts.
	Under the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990 (the 1990 Act), the Secretary of State has the power to make regulations about the membership and procedure of NHS trusts. The Secretary of State exercised this power in making the NHS Trusts (Membership and Procedure) Regulations 1990. Under the 1990 Act, the Secretary of State appoints the chairman and the non-executive directors of the trust, although both these functions have been delegated to the NHS Appointments Commission. The Secretary of State also has powers, subject to provisions set out in the 1990 Regulations, to terminate the tenure of office of the chairman and non-executive directors of a trust in certain circumstances.
	The Secretary of State can direct an NHS trust in relation to the exercise of their functions under section 17 of the NHS Act 1977 ('the 1977 Act').
	The Secretary of State can dissolve an NHS trust by means of an order if she considers it appropriate in the interests of the health service (under the 1990 Act), subject to the provisions of the NHS trusts (Consultation on Establishment and Dissolution) Regulations 1996.
	The Secretary of State can make an intervention order under section 84A of the 1977 Act if she is of the opinion that the trust is not performing one or more of its functions adequately or at all, or that there are significant failings in the way the body is being run and she is satisfied that it is appropriate for her to intervene. An intervention order may provide for the removal or suspension from office of trust members and their replacement with other specified individuals, or for certain functions to be carried out by a specified individual, or for a function of the trust to be performed in a way that will achieve objectives specified in the directions.
	The Secretary of State can make a default order under section 85 of the 1977 Act where she is of the opinion that a NHS trust has failed to carry out functions conferred on them under the 1977 Act or the 1990 Act or have failed to comply with regulations or directions relating to those functions. The effect of the default order is to terminate the tenure of office of the members of the trust and provide for the appointment of new members and may make such supplementary provision as the Secretary of State deems necessary.

Children's Oral Hygiene

Peter Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has to improve children's oral hygiene; and if she will make a statement.

Rosie Winterton: At a population level, the fluoridation of water supplies offers the most potential for reducing dental disease in children. By reforming the relevant legislation we have given strategic health authorities a realistic option of fluoridating their water, provided they can show they have the support of the local population. In addition, advice on oral health promotion is given in schools and we have piloted the Brushing for Life Scheme in areas with the highest levels of tooth decay including all Sure Start areas which do not receive fluoridated water. The scheme provides for health visitors to give packs containing a toothbrush, a tube of fluoridated toothpaste and a leaflet on oral hygiene to the parents and carers of young children when they attend child health clinics for development checks at eight months, 18 months and three years and above.

Connecting for Health Smartcards

Richard Bacon: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which primary care trusts have issued Connecting for Health smartcards with the same PIN number for every user.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 20 July 2005
	A number of smartcards issued during May 2005 by staff acting on behalf of NHS Connecting for Health, in connection with the national programme for information technology, to general practitioners within the Castle Point and Rochford, and the Southend primary care trust (PCT) areas. Though serious in itself, this breach of procedures has not posed a significant risk to the confidentiality of patient information.
	An internal audit inquiry into the circumstances and details of this lapse in security arrangements has been commissioned by the Essex strategic health authority.
	Local procedures have been further tightened to require ensuring smartcard end users change the passcode immediately on receipt of their card, and confirm in writing that this has been done. These will be regularly audited to ensure compliance. NHS Connecting for Health have also initiated a national confidence check' of smartcard registration procedures across all strategic health authorities, re-emphasising the very great importance which is attached to strict adherence to these.

Dentistry

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what percentage of people were registered with an NHS dentist in each primary care trust in London at the end of (a) March 1997, (b) March 2001 and (c) March 2005; what percentage of each population this represented in each year; how much was allocated to improve access to NHS dentistry in (i) 200405, (ii) 200506, (iii) 200607 and (iv) 200708 in (A) total and (B) per 1000 head of population; how many additional NHS dental patient registrations she expects these resources to provide in (1) 200405, (2) 200506, (3) 200607 and (4) 200708; how many additional whole-time equivalent dentists are expected to become registered in (w) 200405, (x) 200506, (y) 200607 and (z) 200708; and how many NHS dentists there were at 31 December (aa) 1997, (bb) 2001 and (cc) 2004.

Rosie Winterton: The main tables show the percentages of people registered with a national health service dentist in each primary care trust (PCT) in London as at 31 March for the years 2001 and 2005. Data are not available for 1997, as PCTs did not exist then.
	In 200405, the Department allocated a total of 50 million to strategic health authorities (SHAs) to improve access, choice and quality in NHS dentistry. The allocations to the five London SHAs are as follows:
	
		
			 SHA Allocation () 
		
		
			 North Central London 1,374,000 
			 North East London 1,853,000 
			 North West London 1,919,000 
			 South East London 1,664,000 
			 South West London 1,233,000 
		
	
	London SHAs also received resources as a result of the successful personal dental service (PDS) applications in 200405 and 200506. Allocations for 200607 and 200708 have not been made.
	The criteria for distribution from the centre to the SHAs was based on weighted capitation, reflecting population and deprivation. From then, on it is up to individual SHAs to decide how to distribute these funds at a local level.
	General dental service (GDS) patient registration is not the currency used to measure additional expenditure on NHS services.
	In 200405, it was expected that SHAs would use their share of the 50 million resources to expand local services, by the end of October 2005, by the whole-time equivalent of:
	
		
			 SHA Whole-time equivalent 
		
		
			 North Central London 10 
			 North East London 13 
			 North West London 13 
			 South East London 12 
			 South West London 13 
		
	
	No whole-time equivalent target has been set for 200506, 200607, 200708 and no targets or resources have been set for these years.
	The main table also shows the number of dentists by London SHA as at 31 December in the years 1997, 2001 and 2004.
	
		Percentage of people registered with a NHS dentist in each PCT in London as at 31 March each year
		
			  1997 2001 2005(52) 
			  Child Adult All Child Adult All Child Adult All 
		
		
			 North West London SHA 48 54 52 53 41 44 53 41 43 
			 Brent Teaching n/a n/a n/a 57 46 49 56 46 48 
			 Ealing n/a n/a n/a 58 43 46 60 45 49 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham n/a n/a n/a 46 34 36 49 41 42 
			 Harrow n/a n/a n/a 56 38 42 54 39 42 
			 Hillingdon n/a n/a n/a 57 45 48 53 40 43 
			 Hounslow n/a n/a n/a 57 47 50 63 52 55 
			 Kensington and Chelsea n/a n/a n/a 27 21 22 24 18 19 
			 Westminster n/a n/a n/a 51 46 47 42 39 40 
			   
			 North Central London SHA 46 51 50 51 40 42 52 39 41 
			 Barnet n/a n/a n/a 49 29 33 48 29 33 
			 Camden n/a n/a n/a 45 47 47 42 40 40 
			 Enfield n/a n/a n/a 57 36 41 59 39 44 
			 Haringey Teaching n/a n/a n/a 60 48 50 62 49 52 
			 Islington n/a n/a n/a 41 47 46 40 40 40 
			 North East London SHA 40 49 47 45 37 39 45 36 39 
			 Barking and Dagenham n/a n/a n/a 41 35 36 42 35 36 
			 City and Hackney Teaching n/a n/a n/a 28 31 30 26 29 28 
			 Havering n/a n/a n/a 60 43 47 62 42 46 
			 Newham n/a n/a n/a 40 35 36 40 34 36 
			 Redbridge n/a n/a n/a 61 45 49 65 48 52 
			 Tower Hamlets n/a n/a n/a 31 28 28 28 25 26 
			 Waltham Forest n/a n/a n/a 54 39 42 52 38 42 
			   
			 South East London SHA 48 48 48 63 44 49 64 45 49 
			 Bexley n/a n/a n/a   
			 Bromley n/a n/a n/a 56 26 33 60 30 37 
			 Greenwich Teaching n/a n/a n/a 61 38 44 62 41 46 
			 Lambeth n/a n/a n/a 50 45 46 44 37 38 
			 Lewisham n/a n/a n/a 52 42 44 58 46 49 
			 Southwark n/a n/a n/a 44 39 40 46 40 42 
			   
			 South West London SHA 54 48 49 56 15 28 55 34 39 
			 Croydon n/a n/a n/a 56 41 45 55 39 42 
			 Kingston n/a n/a n/a 64 32 39 62 30 37 
			 Richmond and Twickenham n/a n/a n/a 60 28 35 54 21 27 
			 Sutton and Merton n/a n/a n/a 51 37 40 56 40 43 
			 Wandsworth n/a n/a n/a 55 39 42 51 33 36 
		
	
	n/a = Population data not available.
	(52) 2003 estimated population figures.
	Notes:
	1. The number of registrations are based on a snapshot of the Dental Practice Board's registration database taken at the end of March each year and subsequent retrospective notifications of changes to registrations have not been included.
	2. An active registration is a patient registered with a dentist at the end of March each year.
	3. Some double counting may occur in the totals when a patient has been newly registered with a dentist in one PCT, but not yet de-registered from a dentist in another PCT. These considerations contribute to some of the month-to-month fluctuations at PCT level.
	4. Most PDS schemes that have registrations have a re-registration period in excess of 15 months, so the figures for PDS schemes are generally higher than they would have been for the same attendance pattern under GDS.
	5. Some PDS schemes do not have any registrations, e.g. dental access centres and will not therefore be included in these figures.
	6. A dentist with a GDS or PDS contract may provide as little or as much NHS treatment as he or she chooses or has agreed with the PCT.
	7. The Dental Practice Board has no information concerning the amount of time dedicated to NHS work by individual dentists.
	8. The patients' registrations have been allocated to areas according to the postcode of the dentist's surgery.
	9. The areas have been defined using practice postcodes within the current boundaries.
	10. There are a small number of unallocated registrations.
	
		Number of NHS dentists with GDS and PDS in London as at 31 December
		
			   1997 2001 2004 
		
		
			  North West London SHA 1,025 1,076 1,086 
			 5K5 Brent Teaching 161 166 176 
			 5HX Ealing 214 198 191 
			 5H1 Hammersmith and Fulham 133 162 153 
			 5K6 Harrow 106 122 130 
			 5AT Hillingdon 106 114 129 
			 5HY Hounslow 143 155 143 
			 5LA Kensington and Chelsea 86 86 92 
			 5LC Westminster 212 212 198 
			  
			  North Central London SHA 637 722 734 
			 5A9 Barnet 182 204 200 
			 5K7 Camden 153 167 169 
			 5C1 Enfield 114 136 164 
			 5C9 Haringey Teaching 129 129 137 
			 5K8 Islington 89 141 121 
			  
			  North East London SHA 529 601 664 
			 5C3 City and Hackney Teaching 100 87 89 
			 5C4 Tower Hamlets 65 71 97 
			 5A4 Havering 84 106 116 
			 5C5 Newham 83 91 101 
			 5NA Redbridge 109 146 147 
			 5C4 Tower Hamlets 65 71 97 
			 5NC Waltham Forest 81 90 106 
			  
			  South East London SHA 626 666 713 
			 TAK Bexley 88 89 99 
			 5A7 Bromley 139 156 169 
			 5A8 Greenwich Teaching 95 103 116 
			 5LD Lambeth 132 140 153 
			 5LF Lewisham 112 131 120 
			 5LE Southwark 109 101 108 
			  
			  South West London SHA 636 699 714 
			 5K9 Croydon 176 178 201 
			 5A5 Kingston 69 73 80 
			 5M6 Richmond and Twickenham 96 107 116 
			 5M7 Sutton and Merton 166 193 204 
			 5LG Wandsworth 162 177 158 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The figures are based on the numbers of dentists with open GDS or PDS contracts.
	2. The dentists include principals, assistants and trainees.
	3. Prison contracts have not been included in this analysis.
	4. The figures provide a snapshot of the number of individual dentists with an open contract at 31 December.
	5. A dentist with a GDS or PDS contract may provide as little or as much NHS treatment as he or she chooses or has agreed with the PCT.
	6. The Dental Practice Board has no information concerning the amount of time dedicated to NHS work by individual dentists.
	7. The figures provide an accurate figure taking into account any notifications received up to 31 January 2005.
	8. The figures given by PCT and SHA include all dentists practising in that area.
	9. Some dentists may have an open GDS or PDS contract in more than one PCT or SHA and therefore they will appear in the figures for each PCT in which they practise.

Dentistry

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many calls to NHS Direct about access to an NHS dentist there were in (a) England and (b) each strategic health authority in each month since November 2001, broken down by (i) emergency, (ii) urgent, (iii) routine and (iv) other calls.

Rosie Winterton: Calls to NHS Direct about access to a national health service dentist in each month since November 2001 by emergency, urgent, routine and other are shown in the table. The information relates to England only. Similar information for each strategic health authority area is not routinely collected.
	
		Number
		
			  Total Emergency Urgent Routine Not known 
		
		
			 November 2001 10,922 1,143 2,542 6,546 691 
			 December 2001 10,023 1,456 3,274 4,482 811 
			 January 2002 13,064 1,605 3,078 7,124 1,257 
			 February 2002 10,316 1,073 2,902 5,535 806 
			 March 2002 13,336 1,061 3,849 6,742 1,684 
			 April 2002 15,472 1,666 4,241 8,322 1,243 
			 May 2002 15,693 1,506 4,287 8,361 1,539 
			 June 2002 14,726 1,551 4,598 7,145 1,432 
			 July 2002 16,032 1,539 4,164 8,827 1,502 
			 August 2002 15,797 1,584 4,646 8,303 1,264 
			 September 2002 14,862 1,387 3,886 8,229 1,360 
			 October 2002 15,912 1,409 3,457 9,671 1,375 
			 November 2002 15,770 1,456 3,381 9,505 1,428 
			 December 2002 14,629 1,729 4,308 7,149 1,443 
			 January 2003 17,860 1,614 3,648 10,952 1,646 
			 February 2003 13,576 1,220 3,075 7,968 1,313 
			 March 2003 15,325 1,416 3,407 9,093 1,409 
			 April 2003 15,863 1,399 3,510 9,446 1,508 
			 May 2003 16,257 1,471 3,977 9,307 1,502 
			 June 2003 17,404 1,563 3,823 10,485 1,533 
			 July 2003 19,012 1,581 4,192 10,723 2,516 
			 August 2003 18,016 1,806 4,201 10,471 1,538 
			 September 2003 19,472 1,708 4,117 11,350 2,297 
			 October 2003 19,829 1,529 3,733 10,905 3,662 
			 January 2004 19,702 1,462 3,613 12,726 1,901 
			 February 2004 18,258 1,575 3,653 11,312 1,718 
			 March 2004 19,330 1,392 3,503 12,506 1,929 
			 April 2004 16,383 1,395 2,680 10,559 1,749 
			 May 2004 16,202 1,762 3,949 8,701 1,790 
			 October 2004 23,850 2,649 4,431 14,426 2,344 
			 November 2004 23,117 2,158 4,059 14,035 2,865 
			 December 2004 19,550 2,603 4,602 10,206 2,139 
			 January 2005 20,440 2,020 3,215 12,734 2,471 
			 February 2005 17,224 1,619 2,342 11,584 1,679 
			 March 2005 17,547 1,725 2,739 11,318 1,765 
			 April 2005 19,753 1,845 2,890 12,844 2,174 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Routine includes calls requesting routine information only about where to find a dentist and calls requesting routine dental health advice and information about where to find a dentist.
	2. Data for November and December 2003 and June to September 2004 is not available.

Dentistry

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many graduates in dentistry qualified in (a) 200304 and (b) 200405.

Rosie Winterton: In England 578 dental students graduated in 200304. The provisional figure for 200405 is 588.

Dentistry

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many dentists there are in (a) England and (b) each strategic health authority (i) in total and (ii) who are recorded on NHS.UK as accepting new NHS patients.

Rosie Winterton: Information on the number of dentists in the United Kingdom, by strategic health authority (SHA) is shown in the table.
	Information about dentists taking on new national health service patients is not centrally collected. However, some information about dental practices within primary care trusts (PCTs) currently taking on new NHS patients can be found on the NHS website at http://www.nhs.uk/England/AuthoritiesTrusts/Pct/list. aspx
	Not all dentists who are accepting new patients indicate this on NHS.UK. However PCTs and NHS Direct are able to provide this information to local people.
	
		General dental service (GDS) and personal dental service (PDS), number of dentists in England by SHA area as at 31 March 2005
		
			   Number 
		
		
			 England  20,088 
			
			 Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire SHA Q20 993 
			 Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire SHA Q02 841 
			 Birmingham and The Black Country SHA Q27 880 
			 Cheshire and Merseyside SHA Q15 1,020 
			 County Durham and Tees Valley SHA Q10 411 
			 Cumbria and Lancashire SHA Q13 746 
			 Dorset and Somerset SHA Q22 521 
			 Essex SHA Q03 628 
			 Greater Manchester SHA Q14 1,032 
			 Hampshire and Isle of Wight SHA Q17 771 
			 Kent and Medway SHA Q18 644 
			 Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland SHA Q25 535 
			 Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire SHA Q01 883 
			 North and East Yorkshire and Northern Lincolnshire  SHA Q11 629 
			 North Central London SHA Q05 743 
			 North East London SHA Q06 679 
			 North West London SHA Q04 1,101 
			 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear SHA Q09 567 
			 Shropshire and Staffordshire SHA Q26 571 
			 South East London SHA Q07 708 
			 South West London SHA Q08 717 
			 South West Peninsula SHA Q21 738 
			 South Yorkshire SHA Q23 500 
			 Surrey and Sussex SHA Q19 1,388 
			 Thames Valley SHA Q16 1,107 
			 Trent SHA Q24 948 
			 West Midlands South SHA Q28 683 
			 West Yorkshire SHA Q12 800 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The figures given by SHA include all dentists practicing in that area. Some dentists may have an open GDS or PDS contract in more than one SHA and therefore have been counted more than once. Therefore the England figure is not a sum of SHA totals.
	2. Prison contracts have been excluded.
	3. The areas have been defined using practice postcodes within the specified areas.
	Source:
	Dental Practice Board.

Dentistry

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which primary care trusts do not comply with (a) clinical and (b) distance standards for providing full access to NHS dentistry.

Rosie Winterton: Primary care trusts (PCTs) are responsible for setting local distance standards for access to dentistry, and for monitoring these standards. Information on each PCTs performance against its own local standards is not collected centrally.
	There are currently no clinical standards for national health service dentistry that PCTs are monitored against.

Emergency Contraception

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many morning-after pills have been distributed by Oxford Primary Care Trust in each of the last 48 months.

Caroline Flint: The information requested is shown in the table.
	
		British National Formulary nameLevonorgestrel
		
			 Period name Total items Total act cost () 
		
		
			 June 2001 132 676.61 
			 July 2001 70 353.85 
			 August 2001 75 377.95 
			 September 2001 92 469.83 
			 October 2001 213 1,072.47 
			 November 2001 201 979.15 
			 December 2001 94 450.64 
			 January 2002 147 705.03 
			 February 2002 166 795.20 
			 March 2002 155 785.05 
			 April 2002 98 479.84 
			 May 2002 176 884.09 
			 June 2002 123 579.85 
			 July 2002 108 558.01 
			 August 2002 67 367.53 
			 September 2002 84 439.80 
			 October 2002 120 619.12 
			 November 2002 194 1,156.24 
			 December 2002 109 602.07 
			 January 2003 112 700.08 
			 February 2003 167 955.06 
			 March 2003 107 1,144.72 
			 April 2003 115 697.73 
			 May 2003 178 1,032.09 
			 June 2003 163 873.86 
			 July 2003 102 630.91 
			 August 2003 74 414.22 
			 September 2003 150 828.03 
			 October 2003 152 924.92 
			 November 2003 157 924.54 
			 December 2003 117 632.91 
			 January 2004 138 723.20 
			 February 2004 146 783.14 
			 March 2004 144 743.98 
			 April 2004 150 813.48 
			 May 2004 149 900.66 
			 June 2004 170 907.13 
			 July 2004 91 476.12 
			 August 2004 99 522.68 
			 September 2004 81 457.55 
			 October 2004 180 1,000.29 
			 November 2004 184 1,076.72 
			 December 2004 150 848.09 
			 January 2005 96 575.30 
			 February 2005 128 658.32 
			 March 2005 135 673.38 
			 April 2005 158 823.84 
			 May 2005 155 815.72 
		
	
	Notes:
	ePACT Data
	1. This information was obtained from the Prescribing Analysis and Cost (PACT) system, which covers prescriptions prescribed by GP practices in England and dispensed in the community in the UK. Prescriptions written within a GP practice but dispensed outside the primary care trust will be included in the PCT in which the GP practice is based.
	2. Prescriptions written in England but dispensed outside England are included. Prescriptions written in hospitals/clinics that are dispensed in the community, prescriptions dispensed in hospitals and private prescriptions are not included in PACT data. It is important to note this as some BNF sections have a high proportion of prescriptions written in hospitals that are dispensed in the community. For example, BNF chapter 4, Central Nervous System has a fair proportion of items written in mental health clinics that are dispensed in the communitythese prescriptions are not included in the PACT data.
	Source:
	Based on the Selections:
	PCT Oxford City
	for National at Summary Level Selected Organisations
	Levonorgestrel
	for BNF at Summary Level Selected Drugs.
	Date produced 13 July 2005.

Emergency Contraception

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what guidance her Department (a) has issued and (b) plans to issue to (i) general practitioners and (ii) pharmacists regarding the availability of emergency contraception over the counter without prescription from dispensing chemists.

Caroline Flint: The Department has not, and does not plan to issue guidance to general practitioners regarding the availability of emergency contraception over the counter without prescription from dispensing chemists.
	Guidance for pharmacists on emergency hormonal contraception is available in the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain's practice guidance, which is regularly reviewed and updated.

Ethical Recruitment

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how many recruitment agencies have been removed from the list of recruitment agencies complying with the code of practice on international recruitment since 2001;
	(2)  if she will estimate the number and proportion of recruitment agencies in England that are on the list of agencies which adhere to the code of practice on international recruitment.

Liam Byrne: The number of agencies listed as compliant with the code of practice is 233. Data that identify the number of agencies supplying the national health service are not collected centrally.
	Between early 2001 and July 2005, seven agencies were removed from the list of agencies compliant with the code.
	All NHS employers are strongly commended to adhere to the code of practice in all matters concerning the international recruitment of healthcare professionals across all disciplines.

Foetal Viability

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate she has made of the earliest gestational age at which an unborn child may be capable of being born alive.

Caroline Flint: The Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953, as amended, provides for the registration of babies born dead after 24 weeks gestation and this is described as the legal age of viability. Guidance from the British Association of Perinatal Medicine introduces the concept of a threshold of viability as being from 22 to 26 weeks gestation. Although the possibility of survival of extremely pre-term babies has improved, data suggests that, even with modern intensive care, chances of survival at 22 weeks gestation are only approximately 1 per cent., whereas this increases to 26 per cent. at 24 weeks. A recent briefing paper from the British Medical Association, Abortion time limits, highlighted that gestational age is not the only factor that affects the possibility of a foetus being considered viable.

Food Supplements Directive

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health for what reasons the Food Supplements Directive was not discussed at the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council meeting on 2 and 3 June.

Caroline Flint: The Food Supplements Directive was not on the agenda for the Health Council on 2 and 3 June. I have spoken to the Commissioner for Health and Consumer Affairs for the European Commission regarding the directive. We are, of course, in close communication with the Commission and are encouraged with the constructive responses we have been getting.
	We have made clear that we want consumers to continue to have a wide choice of supplements. At the same time, consumers need the information to make their choice an informed one.

Foreign Animal Species

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many cases of illness due to exposure to foreign animal species have been reported in each of the last five years; and what species were involved in each case.

Caroline Flint: The Department does not have ready access to the information requested. The Health Protection Agency holds surveillance information for several zoonotic diseases, including food poisoning, but will not usually be able to relate this directly to exposure to foreign animal species. For diseases where this can be done, such as rabies and anthrax exposure, the figures for the United Kingdom are shown in the following table.
	
		
			  Rabies Anthrax 
		
		
			 2000 0 0 
			 2001 2 2 
			 2002 1 0 
			 2003 0 0 
			 2004 0 0 
		
	
	For both the rabies cases in 2001, these were acquired abroad and were due to direct exposure to infected dogs. Both patients died. The rabies case in 2002 was also fatal. It was due to direct exposure within the UK to a species of bat which also occurs abroad. Both the cases of anthrax recovered following treatment and were due to exposure within the UK to infected animal skins, though the species of animal is not known.

Graduate Fast-track Medical Places

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many graduate fast track medical places there were in the latest year for which figures are available; how many applicants there were for each place; and what plans she has to increase the number of places available.

Liam Byrne: The planned number of graduate entry four-year course places in England in academic year 200405 was 593. Information from the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service shows that the number of applicants for such places totalled 4,211 and the number of accepted applicants was 665. Information from the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), which records the number of students on the first year of these courses, including students who have deferred entry from a previous year and students repeating the year due to examination failure of ill health, shows that intake to these courses in 200405 was 691.
	The Department and HEFCE will shortly be considering the potential for further expansion of medical student numbers.

Health Authorities/Trusts

Frank Dobson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 11 July 2005, reference 10011, when her Department ceased to collect information informally on the current financial position of health authorities and trusts which might be in deficit.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 14 July 2005
	The Department does collect monitoring information on the financial position of the national health service but does not publish information on individual NHS bodies until audited information is available because information changes during the financial year.
	The latest year for which audited data on the financial position of NHS organisations is available is 200304.

Healthcare Commission Inspection Reports

Tim Boswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what response her Department plans to make to the findings of the local inspection reports published by the Healthcare Commission as part of its review of the National Service Framework for Older People.

Liam Byrne: The Department will wait until the national conclusions of the Healthcare Commission's work are available before deciding what its response might be.
	The Healthcare Commission has recently been sharing the individual local inspections with the Department, but the only comments sought on these have been on factual accuracy.

Mental Health

David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list bodies referred to as those with responsibility for protecting the public in paragraph 13 of the introduction to the Government response to the report of the Joint Committee on the draft Mental Health Bill 2004.

Rosie Winterton: The organisations referred to in paragraph 13 of the introduction to the Government response to the report of the Joint Committee on the draft Mental Health Bill 2004, which have a responsibility for protecting the public are the police, the courts, the probation service and the Prison Service.

Ministerial Meetings

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the occasions, including the date and place, when (a) officials and (b) Ministers from her Department have attended (i) conferences and (ii) meetings where (A) abortion and (B) euthanasia has been discussed in each of the last five years; and if she will make a statement.

Caroline Flint: This information is not centrally available. Ministers and departmental officials meet with a wide range of stakeholders about a wide range of issues, including euthanasia and abortion, both formally and informally.

New Forest Primary Care Trust

Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will investigate (a) the propriety of the decision by New Forest Primary Care Trust (PCT) to reduce the number of options offered for public consultation about the future of in-patient beds in community hospitals from five to two and (b) the basis for proposals by New Forest PCT to close in-patient beds in community hospitals for (i) medical and (ii) financial reasons.

Caroline Flint: It is for primary care trusts, in consultation with stakeholders locally, such as overview and scrutiny committees, to take decisions on how local health services can be improved and to ensure that they are a clinical and cost effective use of resources. No final decisions will be taken on the future of community hospitals locally without full, public consultation.
	I understand that New Forest Primary Care Trust has written to the hon. Member on this matter.

NHS Staff (Absences)

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what progress has been made on meeting the target to reduce the number of incidences of (a) violence against and (b) sickness absence of staff in the NHS by 30 per cent. by the end of 200304.

Jane Kennedy: In April 2003f the national health service security management service (NHS SMS) was created and assumed policy and operational responsibility for the management of security in the NHS, including work to tackle violence against NHS staff. In November 2003, the NHS SMS introduced a comprehensive range of measures to tackle incidences of violence against NHS staff, both proactively and reactively. The NHS SMS has begun a programme of work to identify the true nature, scale and extent of the problem. Once this work is completed, meaningful and achievable targets for delivering a secure environment for NHS staff will be set.
	The Department's fifteenth annual report was published on 21 June 2005. This report includes details of progress in reducing the levels of absence due to sickness. The report is available in the Library and on the Department's website at www.dh.gov.uk/PublicationsAndStatistics/Publications/AnnualReports.
	Figures for sickness absence are generally published for whole sectors. Figures for the NHS compare favourably with other public sector employers. Overall, the sickness absence figures for the NHS have changed little over the past five years. The Department's survey of sickness rates over the last four years show a steady state, with 4.7 per cent, in 2000 and 4.6 per cent, in 2004.
	The Improving Working Lives initiative is now well embedded in the NHS. This promotes more flexible working, helps staff manage a healthy balance between work and commitments outside work, and requires NHS employers to tackle issues such as safety, health and well being.

Ovarian Tissue Transplants

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many ovarian tissue transplants there were in each of the last five years; and how many were (a) successful and (b) unsuccessful.

Caroline Flint: No transplants of ovarian tissue have been performed in the United Kingdom.
	In February 2004, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) published a clinical guideline for the national health service on the assessment and treatment for people with fertility problems. Part 1.15 of the guideline, covering applications of cryopreservation in cancer treatment, says:
	Women preparing for medical treatment that is likely to make them infertile should be offered oocyte or embryo cryostorage as appropriate if they are well enough to undergo ovarian stimulation and egg collection, provided that this will not worsen their condition and provided that sufficient time is available. They should be informed that oocyte cryostorage has very limited success and that the cryopreservation of ovarian tissue is still in an early stage of development.
	A recent report from the United States of America mentioned a patient who apparently has had a successful ovarian transplantation involving her sister as a donor. We note that the British Fertility Society regards this procedure as an interesting development that must be viewed as experiment, probably applicable only to an exceptionally small number of patients, and which raises ethical issues about the impact on the donor.

Patient Transfers (Escorts)

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the risks of transferring unaccompanied patients between accident and emergency units by taxi in the absence of available ambulances.

Liam Byrne: It is for the local national health service to ensure appropriate transport and governance arrangements are in place to support the transfer of patients between accident and emergency departments.
	The NHS Modernisation Agency issued Driving Change: Good practice guidelines for Primary Care Trusts on commissioning arrangements for emergency ambulance services and non-emergency patient transport services in September 2004.
	In 1991, the Department issued guidance on Ambulance and other patient transport services: Operation, use and performance standards, which includes reference to performance standards and quality of service issues.
	Copies of both documents are available in the Library.

Public Interest Disclosure Act

Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what facilities are in place to ensure that her Department adheres to its obligations under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998.

Liam Byrne: Guidance on whistle-blowing in the national health service was issued in September 1999 following the coming into force of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998.
	This guidance required every NHS trust and health authority (HA) to have in place policies and procedures which comply with the Act. A policy pack, So Long Silencer was subsequently produced, in partnership with Public Concern at Work, and issued to all trusts and HAs in July 2003.
	This pack included materials to help employers develop effective whistle-blowing policies and procedures and to promote a climate of openness and dialogue in the NHS. A complementary pack, tailored for the use of general practitioners, will be issued shortly by NHS employers and Public Concern at Work.

Recruitment Agencies

John Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether she has issued a direction banning the NHS from using recruitment agencies which have not signed up to the code of practice on international recruitment.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 19 July 2005
	No direction has been issued to the national health service to comply with the code of practice for international recruitment of healthcare professionals, but the NHS is commended to use only recruitment agencies that comply with the code of practice for domestic and international recruitment.

Asylum Seekers

Mark Durkan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what criteria are used to decide whether a Northern Ireland based (a) asylum seeker and (b) other immigration detainee should be detained in (i) Dungavel Immigration Removal Centre and (ii) other immigration removal centres in Great Britain.

Tony McNulty: The detention location for any detainee is decided on a case by case basis after an individual risk assessment which takes into account the particular security and welfare requirements of the detainee in question.

Child Curfew Orders

Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many child curfew orders have been issued in (a) Guildford, (b) Waverley and (c) Surrey in each year since their creation.

Fiona Mactaggart: The information for all Petty Sessional Areas within Surrey is shown in the table. Individual area level information for Guildford and Waverley is not available.
	
		Number of curfew orders given to 10 to 17-year-olds in Surrey, 19962003
		
			   1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 
		
		
			 2848 South-west Surrey PSA 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 3 
			 2849 North Surrey PSA 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 
			 2856 South-east Surrey PSA 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 7 
			 2857 North West Surrey PSA 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 
			 474 Guildford Crown court 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 
			 Surrey police force area 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 19 
			 England and Wales 13 37 155 320 440 1,294 2,353 2,940 
		
	
	Note:
	PSA stands for Petty Sessional Area
	Source:
	RDS NOMS 18/7/2005

Extradition

Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many US citizens have been extradited to the UK under the Extradition Act 2003.

Andy Burnham: Confirmed figures are available for the period between the implementation of the Extradition Act 2003 (the Act), on 1 January 2004, and 30 June 2005.
	Extradition requests made by the UK to territories other than those designated as category 1 under the Act do not fall within the statutory framework of the Act. Instead, they are made under the Crown prerogative. One US citizen was extradited to the UK between 1 January 2004 and 30 June 2005.

Extradition

Mohammad Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many extradition requests have been made under the terms of the Extradition Act 2003.

Andy Burnham: It is necessary to distinguish between requests made by the UK under Part 3 of the Extradition Act 2003 (the Act); and all other requests. Confirmed figures are available for the period between the implementation of the Act, on 1 January 2004, and 30 June 2005.
	Part 3 requests are arrest warrants which have been issued by the UK to any territories designated as Category 1 under the Act. There were 139 Part 3 requests for individuals made by the UK between 1 January 2004 and 30 June 2005.
	Extradition requests made by the UK to any other territories do not fall within the statutory framework of the Act. Instead, they are made under the Crown prerogative. There were 58 such requests made for individuals by the UK between 1 January 2004 and 30 June 2005.

Extradition

Mohammad Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many extradition requests have been received under the terms of the Extradition Act 2003.

Andy Burnham: It is necessary to distinguish between requests to the UK made under Part 1, and those made under Part 2, of the Extradition Act 2003 (the Act). Confirmed figures are available for the period between the implementation of the Act, on 1 January 2004, and 30 June 2005. Part 1 requests are general circulations from all territories designated as Category 1 under the Act, and there is not necessarily a basis for believing that the requested person is in the UK. On this basis, there were 4,027 Part 1 requests for individuals received by the UK between 1 January 2004 and 30 June 2005. 110 of these resulted in arrests in the UK during that period.
	Part 2 requests are requests from all other territories, provided that they have reached a point at which Part 2 proceedings are initiated. By this definition, Part 2 requests include both: (a) requests made by the delivery of Full Order extradition papers to the British Government; and (b) requests in which a provisional arrest for extradition has been made but Full Order papers have not yet been delivered to the British Government. There were 137 Part 2 requests for individuals received by the UK between 1 January 2004 and 30 June 2005.

Illegal Drugs

Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what changes have taken place in the prevalence of the consumption of (a) heroin, (b) cocaine and (c) cannabis in each year since 1998.

Paul Goggins: The British Crime Survey (BCS) measures the extent of drug use in England and Wales in the year before interview. The prevalence of the consumption of cannabis, heroin and cocaine (powder cocaine and crack cocaine) between 1998 and 200304 are shown in the table.
	In the 16 to 24 age range, the use of cannabis has fallen by 12 per cent. since 1998. The Schools Survey 1 also shows a decline in cannabis use among 11 to 15-year-olds. The use of cannabis remained stable among the full 16 to 59 age group.
	The BCS considers separately the extent both of powder cocaine and crack cocaine. Since 2000 the prevalence of powder cocaine by 16 to 24-year-olds has remained stable following a significant increase between 1998 and 2000. There has been no significant change in the prevalence of use of either crack cocaine or heroin between 1998 and 200304, for any age group.
	1 The Schools Survey is an annual survey of smoking, drinking and drug use among secondary school children in England aged 11 to 15. It is funded by the Home Office and the Department of Health and managed by the National Centre for Social Research.
	
		Figures for the proportion of (a) young people (aged 16 to 24 years) and (b) all adults (aged 16 to 59 years) reporting having used different drugs in the year before interview based on British Crime Survey data
		
			  1998 2000 200102 200203 200304 Significance of percentage change 1998 to 200304 
		
		
			 16 to 24-year-olds   
			 Cannabis 28.2 27.0 26.9 25.8 24.8 (59) 
			 Cocaine (powder) 3.1 5.2 4.9 4.7 4.9 (59) 
			 Crack Cocaine 0.3 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.4 n/s 
			 Heroin 0.3 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.4 n/s 
			
			 16 to 59-year-olds   
			 Cannabis 10.3 10.5 10.6 10.9 10.8 n/s 
			 Cocaine (powder) 1.2 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.4 (59) 
			 Crack Cocaine 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 n/s 
			 Heroin 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 n/s 
		
	
	n/s = no significant difference.
	(59) Statistically significant difference at the 5 per cent. level.
	Notes:
	1. As with all survey estimates, particularly those for comparatively rare behaviours such as class A drug use, these estimates are subject to uncertainty. Apparently large year on year changes can occur by chance and cannot necessarily be considered indicative of a real trend over time.
	2. From 2001, the reporting year for BCS data switched from calendar to financial years.
	3. The figures are weighted using population estimates provided by the Office for National Statistics.
	Sources:
	1998, 2000, 200102 and 200203 BCS.

Offender Registration

Cheryl Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects the Vicious and Sex Offenders Register to be completed; what the budget for the project was; and what the cost so far has been.

Hazel Blears: All 43 forces in England and Wales have been operational on the Violent Sexual Offenders Register(ViSOR) since March 2005. ViSOR is also operational in all eight Scottish forces and in Northern Ireland.
	The cost of delivering ViSOR was 9.7 million in total over a four year period and was within the budget allocated to the programme.

Police

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what criteria were used to determine the membership of police authorities; what guidance has been issued on composition; and if he will require police authorities to include members of district councils in their membership.

Hazel Blears: The membership of police authorities is determined by the Police Act 1996. No guidance has been issued with regard to their composition but, there is joint Home Office/Association of Police Authorities guidance about the selection and appointment of independent members and lay justice members on police authorities. The White Paper Building Communities, Beating CrimeA better police service for the 21st Century proposed changes to strengthen the calibre, representative nature and democratic legitimacy of police authority membership including a possible approach to two-tier areas, together with proposals for unitary areas. The Government are considering the way ahead in the light of the responses to the White Paper. Legislation would be needed to give effect to any changes to the membership of police authorities.

Police

Mark Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent discussions he has had with the (a) Chief Constable and (b) police authority in Milton Keynes regarding structural re-organisation.

Hazel Blears: The Home Secretary has not had any recent discussion with the Chief Constable or police authority of Thames Valley regarding structural reorganisation. However, at the Association of Chief Police Officers on 19 May, the Home Secretary made it clear that he did not believe that the current structure of 43 forces was the most effective and efficient arrangement for organising policing in England and Wales. He also made it clear that he had no blueprint for amalgamations, but that the initiative for such amalgamations should be driven locally. To inform the way forward, my right hon. Friend has commissioned Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary to examine the issue of force structures. As well as looking at the case for structural changes, Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary will also be examining the case for greater collaboration and co-operation between forces.

Pre-sentence Reports

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what procedures are followed during the period between convictions and sentencing when a judge requests a pre-sentence report; how that report is compiled; and who is consulted before the report is completed.

Fiona Mactaggart: The guidelines for completing a PSR are contained in Probation Service National Standards and in other guidance issued by the National Probation Directorate. The PSR will be informed by the CPS court papers and there will normally be at least one face-to-face interview with the offender. In all cases the Probation Service will assess likelihood of reconviction and any risk of harm posed by the offender. In the more serious or complicated cases these and other factors will be investigated through use of the Offender Assessment System (OASys). The finished PSR will take account of this and the other information obtained in its preparation and will contain a suitable sentencing proposal.
	Those consulted during the completion of a PSR will vary according to the needs of the case but might include Social Services, local authorities or other criminal justice agencies.

Prisons/Prisoners

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the projected size of the prison case load is for financial years (a) 200506, (b) 200607, (c) 200708 and (d) 200809.

Fiona Mactaggart: The latest prison population projections are published in the Home Office Statistical Bulletin 01/05 Prison Population Projections, 20052011, England and Wales. Figures for 10 scenarios can be found in this document. The scenarios range from 'High' to 'Low'. Projected total prison population figures (annual averages) for High and Low scenarios for the relevant financial years are presented in the table.
	
		
			 Financial year High scenario Low scenario 
		
		
			 200506 74,150 74,030 
			 200607 78,880 74,080 
			 200708 82,580 76,860 
			 200809 84,190 76,770

Prisons/Prisoners

Cheryl Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many out-of-cell hours prisoners in each prison are permitted.

Fiona Mactaggart: The average number of daily hours that prisoners in each establishment spent out of their cells on weekdays and weekends during the financial year 200405 is given in the following table.
	The number of hours that prisoners are permitted to spend out of their cells will vary across the estate. Some establishments may record in excess of 20 hours a day. This will reflect the prison's open category where the level of security is such that prisoners have the right to associate freely for most or all of the day and have broad freedom of movement within the prison. Other establishments display considerably less time out of cell available due to the need for greater supervision and attention.
	
		
			   Establishment name Average of time unlocked on a weekday Average of time unlocked on a weekend day 
		
		
			 Acklington 10.4 9.2 
			 Albany 9.5 7.7 
			 Altcourse 13.1 12.3 
			 Ashfield 10.5 10.5 
			 Ashwell 15.5 15.5 
			 Askham Grange 16.0 16.0 
			 Aylesbury 8.5 6.8 
			 Bedford 8.6 5.9 
			 Belmarsh 9.5 6.0 
			 Birmingham 7.3 6.2 
			 Blakenhurst 8.5 8.3 
			 Blantyre House 15.3 15.3 
			 Blundeston 10.2 7.3 
			 Brinsford 8.5 6.9 
			 Bristol 7.9 6.0 
			 Brixton 7.2 5.4 
			 Brockhill 8.6 7.0 
			 Bronzefield 12.0 10.1 
			 Buckley Hall 13.1 12.8 
			 Bullingdon 8.6 6.3 
			 Bullwood Hall 10.6 7.7 
			 Camp Hill 11.0 8.5 
			 Canterbury 7.8 7.7 
			 Cardiff 9.5 6.0 
			 Castington 8.3 7.6 
			 Channings Wood 9.7 7.0 
			 Chelmsford 7.6 4.1 
			 Coldingley 12.0 9.2 
			 Cookham Wood 9.2 7.5 
			 Dartmoor 10.6 8.4 
			 Deerbolt 8.2 5.4 
			 Doncaster 11.5 11.5 
			 Dorchester 7.9 8.7 
			 Dovegate 11.9 10.5 
			 Dover 12.0 11.7 
			 Downview 10.7 8.7 
			 Drake Hall 16.0 16.0 
			 Durham 9.8 4.0 
			 East Sutton Park 17.0 17.0 
			 Eastwood Park 11.3 8.4 
			 Edmunds Hill 9.5 9.5 
			 Elmley 8.5 7.8 
			 Erlestoke 11.1 9.7 
			 Everthorpe 9.1 7.8 
			 Exeter 8.3 7.4 
			 Featherstone 8.6 10.1 
			 Feltham 7.9 7.2 
			 Ford 13.3 13.3 
			 Forest Bank 10.5 9.6 
			 Foston Hall 10.8 9.5 
			 Frankland 9.3 7.0 
			 Full Sutton 9.4 7.5 
			 Garth 10.0 7.5 
			 Gartree 10.0 7.3 
			 Glen Parva 8.9 5.7 
			 Gloucester 6.9 5.2 
			 Grendon 12.8 8.8 
			 Guys Marsh 9.5 7.5 
			 Haslar 11.0 10.3 
			 Haverigg 10.4 9.7 
			 Hewell Grange 24.0 24.0 
			 High Down 6.4 5.0 
			 Highpoint 10.0 7.5 
			 Hindley 9.9 9.9 
			 Hollesley Bay 15.5 15.5 
			 Holloway 9.0 7.1 
			 Holme House 6.1 5.2 
			 Hull 7.9 7.3 
			 Huntercombe 10.1 8.7 
			 Kingston 11.3 7.9 
			 Kirkham 13.5 13.0 
			 Kirklevington 19.0 19.0 
			 Lancaster 10.0 7.5 
			 Lancaster Farms 10.7 9.7 
			 Latchmere House 19.0 19.0 
			 Leeds 8.9 8.1 
			 Leicester 9.7 7.1 
			 Lewes 7.8 6.5 
			 Leyhill 16.0 16.0 
			 Lincoln 8.9 6.8 
			 Lindholme 10.9 8.4 
			 Littlehey 9.5 7.9 
			 Liverpool 8.4 8.5 
			 Long Lartin 9.0 7.9 
			 Low Newton 10.5 8.5 
			 Lowdham Grange 13.0 11.9 
			 Maidstone 10.0 7.7 
			 Manchester 9.4 8.5 
			 Moorland 12.6 5.7 
			 Morton Hall 15.0 15.0 
			 Mount 8.7 6.9 
			 New Hall 11.4 11.0 
			 North Sea Camp 16.7 16.7 
			 Northallerton 8.8 6.5 
			 Norwich 8.8 7.3 
			 Nottingham 7.1 3.7 
			 Onley 8.9 7.7 
			 Parc 10.2 10.1 
			 Parkhurst 9.2 6.7 
			 Pentonville 7.8 7.1 
			 Portland 7.6 5.0 
			 Preston 8.7 7.5 
			 Ranby 10.6 9.7 
			 Reading 8.0 6.6 
			 Risley 10.5 10.0 
			 Rochester 9.0 6.0 
			 Rye Hill 11.4 11.7 
			 Send 12.7 12.6 
			 Shepton Mallet 10.0 8.1 
			 Shrewsbury 9.5 13.7 
			 Stafford 9.5 5.4 
			 Standford Hill 12.0 12.0 
			 Stocken 10.8 7.2 
			 Stoke Heath 10.3 10.2 
			 Styal 11.6 11.6 
			 Sudbury 12.9 12.9 
			 Swaleside 9.9 7.2 
			 Swansea 9.2 8.5 
			 Swinfen Hall 10.4 6.8 
			 Thorn Cross 12.5 12.5 
			 UskPrescoed 13.8 12.9 
			 Verne 16.0 16.0 
			 Wakefield 9.0 6.6 
			 Wandsworth 6.4 4.2 
			 Warren Hill 10.5 10.0 
			 Wayland 11.5 10.1 
			 Wealstun 11.3 11.1 
			 Weare 9.5 8.4 
			 Wellingborough 9.7 7.7 
			 Werrington 10.7 8.0 
			 Wetherby 9.8 6.5 
			 Whatton 13.1 10.8 
			 Whitemoor 9.7 7.5 
			 Winchester 9.4 7.1 
			 Wolds 12.6 10.6 
			 Woodhill 8.5 6.3 
			 Wormwood Scrubs 8.0 5.1 
			 Wymott 11.1 10.0

Security Services

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many complaints have been made to the relevant Tribunal or Commissioner in relation to the actions of the Security Service since the enactment of the Security Services Acts and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000; and how many complainants had their complaint upheld in each year.

Hazel Blears: The records of the Tribunal (the Security Service Tribunal) established under the Security Service Act 1989 show that the number of complaints it received and those referred to the Commissioner (the Security Service Commissioner) were as follows:
	
		Table 1
		
			   Date  Number of complaints received by Tribunal Number of complaints referred to the Commissioner in accordance with Paragraph 4(1) of Schedule 1 of the 1989 Act 
		
		
			 198990 55 22 
			 1991 29 16 
			 1992 25 5 
			 1993 36 14 
			 1994 42 19 
			 1995 21 13 
			 1996 34 10 
			 1997 45 15 
			 1998 28 24 
			 19992000 22 12 
		
	
	No complaints were upheld.
	The Tribunal (the Investigatory Powers Tribunal) established under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) came into being on 2 October 2000. From that date the Investigatory Powers Tribunal assumed responsibility for the jurisdiction previously held by, amongst others, the Security Service Tribunal.
	In his annual reports to the Prime Minister, the Interception of Communications Commissioner has explained that complaints to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal cannot be easily categorised under the three tribunal system that existed prior to the 2000 Act RIPA (ie. The Interception of Communications Tribunal, the Security Service Tribunal and the Intelligence Services Tribunal). Consequently it is not possible to detail the number of complaints lodged with the Investigatory Powers Tribunal that would have been considered previously by the Security Service Tribunal.
	The total number of complaints received by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal is as follows.
	
		Table 2
		
			  Date Number of complaints to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal 
		
		
			 2000(74) 11 
			 2001 91 
			 2002 130 
			 2003 109 
			 2004 (75) 
		
	
	(74) First three months of operation.
	(75) Figures to be published shortly in the Interception of Communications Commissioner's Annual Report for 2004.
	Of the 341 complaints reported, on no occasion did the Investigatory Powers Tribunal conclude that there had been a contravention of RIPA or the Human Rights Act 1989. Consequently no complaints were upheld.
	The Investigatory Powers Tribunal, like the Security Service Tribunal before it, is a wholly independent body made up of senior members of the legal profession.

Sexual Offences Act

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the Answer of 7 July 2005, Official Report, column 589W, on the Sexual Offences Act, if he will set out the recorded crime data relating to section 15 for the period from 1 May 2004 to 31 March 2005; and if he will make a statement.

Paul Goggins: Further to my answer of 7 July, I confirm that the recorded crime data in relation to section 15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 will be available from 21 July 2005; the data is not available prior to that date of publication.

Work Permits

Humfrey Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many work permits were issued in each of the last three years to individuals to work in the information technology sector; how many persons granted a permit (a) failed to return to their country of origin on its expiry and (b) were notified by the company concerned to his Department as having failed to return.

Tony McNulty: The total number of work permits issued in each of the last three years to employers based in the UK in respect of permit applications made to recruit overseas nationals for work related to the 'computer services' was:
	
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 200203 517,057 
			 200304 18,631 
			 200405 21,646 
		
	
	These figures relate to all jobs in the sector, not just for those in information technology. However, it may be the case that not all the overseas nationals issued with a work permit were successful in gaining entry clearance to take up their employment in the UK.
	Information is not available on the number of work permit holders who have failed to return to their country of origin. In addition we are not able to provide information on the notifications received by companies about permit holders who have either not taken up their employment or where their employment has ceased.
	The Five Year Strategy for Asylum and Immigration announced on 7 February set out the Government's intention to place obligations on the sponsors of migrants, including an intention to require employers to report if a migrant leaves the employment for which they were admitted.
	Moreover, the Government have announced their plans to introduce an e-Borders (electronic borders) programme. e-Borders is a medium to long-term multi-agency initiative to re-shape the United Kingdom's border protection structure. It is co-ordinated by the Home Office Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) in partnership with key border control, law enforcement and intelligence agencies: HM Customs and Revenue, the Intelligence Agencies, the Police Service and UK Visas. Other Departments and agencies such as the Department of Work and Pensions and the Passport Service are involved as major beneficiaries of the e-Borders concept.
	The concept is based upon identifying and checking passengers and their travel credentials well in advance of their commencing travel to, or from, the UK rather than making these checks at the end of their journey. The full e-Borders system is expected to process passenger information on flights arriving in and departing from the UK at all major ports by 2010. e-borders is initially being trialled as Project Semaphore.
	The information that is captured of every passenger passing into or out of the UK will, for the first time, give us specific information on who is in or out of the UK, and for how long and under what status or conditions. This information will be available to other parts of IND, the Home Office and other Government Departments

WRVS

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the reasons for the decision to end grant funding to the Women's Royal Voluntary Service.

Paul Goggins: Table 1 shows the Home Office grant in aid payments and planned payments to the Women's Royal Voluntary Service (WRVS) from 1995 to 2008.
	An independent review in 1997 identified that WRVS' financial dependence on Government and restrictions on its property holdings were major barriers to its goals of modernisation and independence.
	To help achieve these goals it was agreed with WRVS that the grant in aid be reduced over 10 years to 1 million a year by 200708, a level that is commensurate with that of other large voluntary sector strategic grant recipients, and that the reversionary interest in the properties held on trust be transferred to WRVS absolutely.
	
		Table 1: Home Office grant in aid to WRVS, 199508
		
			 Financial year 000 
		
		
			 199506 6,200 
			 199607 5,840 
			 199708 5,548 
			 199809 5,298 
			 19992000 5,048 
			 200001 4,798 
			 200102 4,548 
			 200203 4,223 
			 200304 3,868 
			 200405 3,448 
			 200506 2,943 
			 200607 (Planned) 2,333 
			 200708 (Planned) 1,000